Nintendo NX will crush XB1 and mame PS4

Can only be good for the ecosystem looking forwards.
 
I don't think Nintendo will have a beastly system with the NX. Rarely in their history have they had the top-tier hardware. They usually opt for older tech that's cheaper to source, easier to manufacture, and, supposedly, easier to develop for since it has been around for a while. They focus on the gaming experience, not specs, usually with some kind of "revolutionary" twist on things (N64 - 3D, joystick controls; wii - motion control; wii U - 2nd screen; 3Ds - stereoscopic 3D; heck, even Virtual Boy tried something new a long time ago). It wouldn't surprise me if they tried to make VR integral to the unit, or some other wacky control device just to have something "new" (perhaps combined console/handheld). But I wouldn't expect better than XBO or PS4 specs. I might not even expect it to match those specs. I would anticipate a solid 1080p machine.

I'm not worried about it though. I think Nintendo does a good job with what they make, and I like their focus on gameplay and experience over specs. Sure, hardware matters, but not everyone cares about ultra-realistic graphics. That segment of the market is already covered, and it would be foolish for them to try to fight for it at this point. The problem is their issue getting developers - I hope that changes, they need it to. But, even if their products aren't for everyone, or kind of fads that people move on from, I really appreciate their attempts at trying new things with a primary objective of being fun.

I'm looking forward to the NX. I don't own a wii-U, nor do any of my friends. But when asked about it, we all want one, it's just a lack of titles holding us back. I'm really close to buying one for Mario Maker though, and with the promise of the new Zelda game coming to the system it may win me over. We'll see. If anything, I'm glad Nintendo is doing something different, and I'm excited to see what they come up with next.
 
Nintendo glove + VR would be hilarious to see again.
 
jamsomito said:
I don't think Nintendo will have a beastly system with the NX. Rarely in their history have they had the top-tier hardware. They usually opt for older tech that's cheaper to source, easier to manufacture, and, supposedly, easier to develop for since it has been around for a while. They focus on the gaming experience, not specs, usually with some kind of "revolutionary" twist on things (N64 - 3D, joystick controls; wii - motion control; wii U - 2nd screen; 3Ds - stereoscopic 3D; heck, even Virtual Boy tried something new a long time ago). It wouldn't surprise me if they tried to make VR integral to the unit, or some other wacky control device just to have something "new" (perhaps combined console/handheld). But I wouldn't expect better than XBO or PS4 specs. I might not even expect it to match those specs. I would anticipate a solid 1080p machine.

I'm not worried about it though. I think Nintendo does a good job with what they make, and I like their focus on gameplay and experience over specs. Sure, hardware matters, but not everyone cares about ultra-realistic graphics. That segment of the market is already covered, and it would be foolish for them to try to fight for it at this point. The problem is their issue getting developers - I hope that changes, they need it to. But, even if their products aren't for everyone, or kind of fads that people move on from, I really appreciate their attempts at trying new things with a primary objective of being fun.

I'm looking forward to the NX. I don't own a wii-U, nor do any of my friends. But when asked about it, we all want one, it's just a lack of titles holding us back. I'm really close to buying one for Mario Maker though, and with the promise of the new Zelda game coming to the system it may win me over. We'll see. If anything, I'm glad Nintendo is doing something different, and I'm excited to see what they come up with next.
Click to expand...
Umm...Starting with the Wii, yeah, but not otherwise. The NES was a beast compared to other consoles when it was released in '83, as was the SNES, N64 and even GC. It was only with the Wii that they decided to not try to make an at least equally powerful hardware.
 
Both the SNES and N64 were released 2 years after their generations counterparts. It was not top-tier hardware for the times they were released, and they both had their limitations. The Wii was not the first to experience this. Also, they all had the lowest launch price of any of the competing mainstream consoles, and AFAIK, never sold consoles for a loss.

I'm in no way saying they were bad systems, they just focused on making it affordable and easy to develop for (supposedly), which isn't possible with top of the line hardware.
 
jamsomito said:
I don't think Nintendo will have a beastly system with the NX. Rarely in their history have they had the top-tier hardware. They usually opt for older tech that's cheaper to source, easier to manufacture, and, supposedly, easier to develop for since it has been around for a while. They focus on the gaming experience, not specs, usually with some kind of "revolutionary" twist on things (N64 - 3D, joystick controls; wii - motion control; wii U - 2nd screen; 3Ds - stereoscopic 3D; heck, even Virtual Boy tried something new a long time ago). It wouldn't surprise me if they tried to make VR integral to the unit, or some other wacky control device just to have something "new" (perhaps combined console/handheld). But I wouldn't expect better than XBO or PS4 specs. I might not even expect it to match those specs. I would anticipate a solid 1080p machine.

I'm not worried about it though. I think Nintendo does a good job with what they make, and I like their focus on gameplay and experience over specs. Sure, hardware matters, but not everyone cares about ultra-realistic graphics. That segment of the market is already covered, and it would be foolish for them to try to fight for it at this point. The problem is their issue getting developers - I hope that changes, they need it to. But, even if their products aren't for everyone, or kind of fads that people move on from, I really appreciate their attempts at trying new things with a primary objective of being fun.

I'm looking forward to the NX. I don't own a wii-U, nor do any of my friends. But when asked about it, we all want one, it's just a lack of titles holding us back. I'm really close to buying one for Mario Maker though, and with the promise of the new Zelda game coming to the system it may win me over. We'll see. If anything, I'm glad Nintendo is doing something different, and I'm excited to see what they come up with next.
Click to expand...

But isn't the lack of developer support connected in some way to the hardware specs?
 
htpc_user said:
But isn't the lack of developer support connected in some way to the hardware specs?
Click to expand...

Maybe somewhat, but it's certainly not the hinging criteria. Look at the 3ds vs the PS Vita for example. Vita specs blow it out if the water but 3ds has a significantly bigger library.

Where specs matter is in ease of development, not raw horsepower.
 
Nintendo has its work cut out. I dont even know why any third party publishers would "pre-sign" up for any NX development at this point without getting a huge check from Nintendo prior. They are going to have to prove they are more than a 1st party software company. I'd say this may be there last foray into consoles otherwise. Might as well go the Sega route at this point and push their titles out to consoles that actually sell.
 
Nintendo says Zelda on NX and Wii U will be the same experience. So much for buying NX at launch.
 
I've owned every Nintendo system except the Virtual Boy and unless something changes drastically, that streak is about to be over.
I'm sure they'll have a new Mario Kart and Smash, but two games just isn't enough anymore. I'm going to need a fleet of 3rd party titles that = better than the stuff on the other consoles. Otherwise, I imagine another Nintendo system gathering dust between the few exclusives I still care about.
 
jamsomito said:
Both the SNES and N64 were released 2 years after their generations counterparts. It was not top-tier hardware for the times they were released, and they both had their limitations. The Wii was not the first to experience this. Also, they all had the lowest launch price of any of the competing mainstream consoles, and AFAIK, never sold consoles for a loss.

I'm in no way saying they were bad systems, they just focused on making it affordable and easy to develop for (supposedly), which isn't possible with top of the line hardware.
Click to expand...
I agree with you on the N64, but what console was more powerful than the SNES at the time?
 
LOL at the Neo Geo. I remember my mom seeing an ad for that system in EGM and kept asking me if it was real. "$200 per game???!!!??? I can assure you that we'll NEVER be getting you that one!"
 
Saying Neo Geo was faster is absurd. That system sold to less than <1% of the console gaming market. It was niche at best. You might as well say that the CPS1 or other arcade cabs were faster too. Because honestly, just as many (or few) people had arcade cabs at home as the Neo Geo.

All the niche consoles that didn't really compete I would say are exempt from competition. Despite some of them being decent. Neo Geo, Turbo Graphics 16, Jaguar, etc.
 
Last edited:
TurboGrafix was a semi-competitive system. The Genesis outsold it (and later the SNES), but it had mainstream ads and high profile games. In Japan it sold really well and was even the top dog at times. I wouldn't lump it in with the Neo Geo and Jaguar.
 
Armenius said:
I agree with you on the N64, but what console was more powerful than the SNES at the time?
Click to expand...

Clarification: The SNES, or the SNES plus whatever expansion chips were loaded in SNES cartridges? Because without those expansion chips, even the Genesis would crush a SNES in terms of raw horsepower.

TurboGrafix was a semi-competitive system. The Genesis outsold it (and later the SNES), but it had mainstream ads and high profile games. In Japan it sold really well and was even the top dog at times. I wouldn't lump it in with the Neo Geo and Jaguar.
Click to expand...

NEC bungled the NA launch, but in parts of Europe and especially Brazil, the TG-16 outperformed the SNES over its lifetime. In any case, the root problem was NEC was leveraging it's traditional PC market, but wasn't able to get its top developers [outside of Falcom] to develop for it en masse. If the old NEC PC game developers [Square, Enix, Capcom, and the like] had backed it, the TG-16 could have easily displaced the Genesis.
 
UnknownSouljer said:
Saying Neo Geo was faster is absurd. That system sold to less than <1% of the console gaming market. It was niche at best. You might as well say that the CPS1 or other arcade cabs were faster too. Because honestly, just as many (or few) people had arcade cabs at home as the Neo Geo.

All the niche consoles that didn't really compete I would say are exempt from competition. Despite some of them being decent. Neo Geo, Turbo Graphics 16, Jaguar, etc.
Click to expand...

The Neo Geo at the time was leaps and bounds better than anything, period. Of course you had less games to choose from but you were in fact getting arcade quality graphics and sound. I remember seeing and hearing the Neo Geo for the first time and could not believe it. You can say it was a niche system, but you cannot deny its position as the biggest baddest system on the market.

That is what was so cool about that generation of consoles. If you had the $$$$ you could go for it and get the best of the best. Now we are at the point where every system is going to be the same.

Even the TG-16 was so much different than the Sega that it was cool to own one. Better colors and decent games. while the battle raged on with sega and nintendo.... Good times.

GET OFF MY LAWN!!
 
IMO, there was a compelling reason to own all of the systems (if you had the $) until fairly recently. With this current generation there are fewer and fewer exclusives, but back in the 90's almost every game was an exclusive. The only exceptions were sports titles and a couple major arcade hits like Street Fighter and MK.
 
HardUp4HardWare said:
The Neo Geo at the time was leaps and bounds better than anything, period. Of course you had less games to choose from but you were in fact getting arcade quality graphics and sound. I remember seeing and hearing the Neo Geo for the first time and could not believe it. You can say it was a niche system, but you cannot deny its position as the biggest baddest system on the market.
Click to expand...

I didn't argue that it wasn't. My argument plainly was: that it wasn't relevant. When I was a kid, I only SAW a Neo Geo. I never even got to play one. And by SAW, I mean I was literally in Japan in a store in which the owner allowed the title screens to loop like in an Arcade. I still have never seen one here in the US.

If your desire is to get in a pissing match about Bugatti Veyrons and McLaren P1's and their "impact on the market" in terms of "how much better they are than anything else" great. Most people will never see one. Those that do will probably see one in a car show because they are an enthusiast. And even fewer will get to actually drive one let alone own it.
In terms of what people will actually own, actually play, and prevalence on the market, I would consider both of those hyper-cars irrelevant. It makes great teenage wall poster art. Or "dream car" lists. But if I can't actually ever buy the thing it makes precisely zero difference in my life. And that's clearly what at least 99% of the market had to say about the Neo Geo.

So if you want to talk about "all time most powerful" fine. I was trying to lean much more towards a useful discussion about most powerful that most could/would actually own. To that end I would, once again to restate, argue that talking about the Neo Geo in terms of top performance is pointless. For most people it was a time of SNES vs the Genesis. With the SNES arguably better in terms of performance (when considering how much more could appear on screen at once, more colors, more colors at once, in comparison to the Genesis and also a significantly better audio chip).
 
Last edited:
My local Software Etc. and EB stores had 1 Neo Geo each and carried maybe 5-6 games.
Per the employees, neither actually sold a system, but there were a few people in town that were buying the games. I recall a crazy bundle in one of the magazines that involved a system, extra sticks, and 3 games for some crazy amount of money...but it was heavily discounted.
I might be making this up, but I think there were no regional differences between Neo Geo models. I knew a guy in college that claimed to have one that he got in Japan, but I can't say I ever saw it.
 
HardUp4HardWare said:
Someone is still jelly that some people could afford a neo Geo
Click to expand...

Just like some people are jelly that they can't afford mega-yacts, hyper cars (plural), 50 million dollar homes, and private jets? Being intentionally inflammatory isn't a defense.


Wikipedia said:
As of March 1997, the Neo Geo and the Neo Geo CD combined had sold 980,000 units worldwide.
Click to expand...

And with that many units sold... your implication is: everyone is jealous? Two console systems from one manufacturer with total worldwide sales of <1M? The SNES sold 49M. The Genesis 30.75M. Even the TurboGrafx16 which I also consider to be irrelevant sold 10 million worldwide (only 2.5M of which was the US... illustrating my point why at least here in the US it wasn't a relevant system. In Japan it was a competitor).
 
Last edited:
UnknownSouljer said:
Just like some people are jelly that they can't afford mega-yacts, hyper cars (plural), 50 million dollar homes, and private jets? Being intentionally inflammatory isn't a defense.




And with that many units sold... your implication is: everyone is jealous? Two console systems from one manufacturer with total worldwide sales of <1M? The SNES sold 49M. The Genesis 30.75M. Even the TurboGrafx16 which I also consider to be irrelevant sold 10 million worldwide (only 2.5M of which was the US... illustrating my point why at least here in the US it wasn't a relevant system. In Japan it was a competitor).
Click to expand...

Sheesh. You really are emotional about this aren't you?

The question wasn't about popularity it was about power.

The Neo Geo was the powerhouse. 3D0 came along with a 699 price tag and that was even more powerful. the NEC CD-ROM added "power" insomuch as it opened up games capacity and content and that was what, 499? I had all of them at one point in time and each one was great in its own way.

But your comparison of a mega-yacht is invalid anyway. I wasn't making huge money back then and I somehow found a way to get these machines.

That is like saying that VR is fail because they are 599 or 799. People buy what they want, has nothing to do with power.
 
HardUp4HardWare said:
Sheesh. You really are emotional about this aren't you?
Click to expand...

Not at all. I've responded with each post very methodically and with facts from sources that I could site if necessary. Despite your accusations and calling me names now twice (jelly, emotional), I haven't responded in kind or flamed or trolled in any way.
I would challenge you to reread any of my posts and site them in context anywhere that you could say I was being more emotional versus simply making statements based upon fact. The internet isn't a place in which emotion comes through. Even less so with me. If it helps you, read what I say in a Ben Stein very dry way.
I'm extremely logical, not to say I don't have emotions, but I rarely if ever let them dictate how I respond in a conversation whether in person or online (although there was one case in recent memory in the Apple subforum in which someone couldn't understand that Displayport ran through Thunderbolt and refused to listen or try a Thunderbolt cable to get his 4K monitor to work with a Mac Pro...).


HardUp4HardWare said:
The question wasn't about popularity it was about power.

The Neo Geo was the powerhouse. 3D0 came along with a 699 price tag and that was even more powerful. the NEC CD-ROM added "power" insomuch as it opened up games capacity and content and that was what, 499? I had all of them at one point in time and each one was great in its own way.
Click to expand...

Your point has been made. I have ceded your point to you (you can check up a few posts and see the post history for yourself... you even quoted it). Or even more to the point, I never said anything to the contrary. My point from the very beginning wasn't about whether it was more powerful or not. But for clarity: yes, it was more powerful. I only shifted the conversation to what was 'relevant'.
At this point I would go on to say, I'm sure everyone else reading our conversation has been drilled. They can form their own opinions.
We can agree to disagree about which is a better topic of discussion: "highest power" versus "power that one could actually afford". I don't see there being a change there, nor any chance for resolution. We both have our opinions on the matter.


HardUp4HardWare said:
But your comparison of a mega-yacht is invalid anyway. I wasn't making huge money back then and I somehow found a way to get these machines.

That is like saying that VR is fail because they are 599 or 799. People buy what they want, has nothing to do with power.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. I agree that people will find ways to buy what they want to buy. There are people down my street that own two Ferrari F360's that they bought new when they came out. One red one black. One Spyder one Modena. And yes I live in middle class suburb land, these are not people living in million dollar homes. They found something they deemed important and purchased these two $110k cars.
So yes, people can find ways to afford things that fall into their hobbies.

However "no" in the overall idea that cost isn't relevant in terms of what are in the hands of the people. If cost was NOT a factor then everyone would own a Ferrari. Everyone would have a yacht. Everyone would have that private jet. But they do not. In fact what we're talking about now proves my point. If everyone could afford a Neo Geo back in the early 90's everyone would have bought one. Because guess what, you're right, it was the fastest system. It was arcade hardware for the home, something every 14 year old would have killed for. But it's high cost made it unattainable for the 99%. This is simply the demand side of supply and demand. If every person then could've afforded the console you'd better believe that they would have manufactured as many consoles as possible to meet that demand, but they didn't because that demand didn't exist. My simile holds for the purpose I was making about the nature of cost being a factor in what people own (that is to say luxury items such as Ferraris versus normal goods). Although our other discussion about power vs relevance can be argued, this one I'm afraid really can't.

So to turn your argument on its head: you owned one because you were and or are a hardcore enthusiast. If you truly don't see that or don't understand that, I would suggest reading and learning about basic economic principles. This (luxury and high priced items such as Ferrari's and Neo Geo's) is/are clearly a case of "price sensitivity" from demand side economics.
 
Last edited:
I'd be curious how many Neo Geo systems that were sold ended up in arcades. I've run into a few arcade builds that were just Neo Geo systems in a cabinet. Granted, all SNK arcade games were pretty close to that - but many literally were Neo Geo consoles that were just hard wired into a cabinet.
 
UnknownSouljer said:
Not at all. I've responded with each post very methodically and with facts from sources that I could site if necessary. Despite your accusations and calling me names now twice (jelly, emotional), I haven't responded in kind or flamed or trolled in any way.
I would challenge you to reread any of my posts and site them in context anywhere that you could say I was being more emotional versus simply making statements based upon fact. The internet isn't a place in which emotion comes through. Even less so with me. If it helps you, read what I say in a Ben Stein very dry way.
I'm extremely logical, not to say I don't have emotions, but I rarely if ever let them dictate how I respond in a conversation whether in person or online (although there was one case in recent memory in the Apple subforum in which someone couldn't understand that Displayport ran through Thunderbolt and refused to listen or try a Thunderbolt cable to get his 4K monitor to work with a Mac Pro...).




Your point has been made. I have ceded your point to you (you can check up a few posts and see the post history for yourself... you even quoted it). Yes, it was more powerful. I only shifted the conversation to what was 'relevant'.
At this point I would go on to say, I'm sure everyone else reading our conversation has been drilled. They can form their own opinions.
We can agree to disagree about which is a better topic of discussion: "highest power" versus "power that one could actually afford". I don't see there being a change there, nor any chance for resolution. We both have our opinions on the matter.




Yes and no. I agree that people will find ways to buy what they want to buy. There are people down my street that own two Ferrari F360's that they bought new when they came out. One red one black. One Spyder one Modena. And yes I live in middle class suburb land, these are not people living in million dollar homes. They found something they deemed important and purchased these two $110k cars.
So yes, people can find ways to afford things that fall into their hobbies.

However "no" in the overall idea that cost isn't relevant in terms of what are in the hands of the people. If cost was NOT a factor then everyone would own a Ferrari. Everyone would have a yacht. Everyone would have that private jet. But they do not. In fact what we're talking about now proves my point. If everyone could afford a Neo Geo back in the early 90's everyone would have bought one. Because guess what, you're right, it was the fastest system. It was arcade hardware for the home, something every 14 year old would have killed for. But it's high cost made it unattainable for the 99%. This is simply the demand side of supply and demand. If every person then could've afforded the console you'd better believe that they would have manufactured as many consoles as possible to meet that demand, but they didn't because that demand didn't exist. My simile holds for the purpose I was making about the nature of cost being a factor in what people own (that is to say luxury items such as Ferraris versus normal goods). Although our other discussion about power vs relevance can be argued, this one I'm afraid really can't.

So to turn your argument on its head: you owned one because you were and or are a hardcore enthusiast. If you truly don't see that or don't understand that, I would suggest reading and learning about basic economic principles. This (luxury and high priced items such as Ferrari's and Neo Geo's) is/are clearly a case of "price sensitivity" from demand side economics.
Click to expand...

Ok Mr Spock you win.

I never ever suggested that the Neo Geo was an "everyman" system. I was simply saying it was the biggest baddest system available as the other poster astutely observed.

As for your lesson in economics I already know all that. Thanks though.

So the only arguement we have left is your Neo Geo ferrari analogy. Most people could afford a Neo Geo by pulling a few strings, very few can own a Ferrari and afford to maintain it especially back then) Your analogy doesn't fit. But I don't care to discuss it any longer. I am off to race my F-16 fighter jet I bought off eBay.

Cheers!
 
If I were an adult back in in the 90's you'd better believe I'd be rocking a Neo Geo. At that time "arcade perfect" was a big deal, and that was the only system that could ever do it.
 
Domingo said:
If I were an adult back in in the 90's you'd better believe I'd be rocking a Neo Geo. At that time "arcade perfect" was a big deal, and that was the only system that could ever do it.
Click to expand...

Well it wasn't all guns and roses with the Neo Geo. If you loved fighting games then great but beyond that the choices were few. Which I guess was fine because they cost $200 each.
 
Azureth said:
Uhh...No, not true at all!

Super Nintendo Vs. Sega Genesis - Comparison of Technical Specs
Click to expand...

No, he's right, every document I've read says the Sega Genesis VDP (i.e. the DMA video engine that makes these consoles so fast) has more pixel pushing bandwidth than the SNES PPU.

And the Genesis processor is nearly twice as powerful. That is a well known fact. You can't castrate a 16-bit 65c816 processor on an 8-bit bus and expect it to perform anywhere near a 16-bit bus 68000 processor. Even if you over-analyze the architectural differences and operations per clock cycle to make the clock speed difference disappear, you still come back to "half the bandwidth."

Moving frames around quickly from one frame to the next requires high bandwidth and processing power, which is why most SNES games didn't do that. It had great paper specs, but no actual ability to move them around quickly.

It doesn't matter how many colors you can display on paper, if you are limited in what they can do. That leaves you with mostly slower games like RPGs, and slow platformers like Super Ghouls n Ghosts., and fast-paced racing games like F-Zero, which are almost devoid of sprites, so the weak processor can keep thatr road moving! You know, exactly the same type of games people had been playing on the NES for about eight years, except now with more colors and sampled sound!

Just to put things in perspective, the Genesis has so much spare power, it can do a respectable job faking Mode 7 effect from F-Zero, and still have enough hardware left to run the game full speed:



http://kotaku.com/f-zero-on-the-genesis-looks-surprisingly-impressive-1690526006

Just throw in a few sprites, and you've got a race :D
 
Last edited:
HardUp4HardWare said:
Well it wasn't all guns and roses with the Neo Geo. If you loved fighting games then great but beyond that the choices were few. Which I guess was fine because they cost $200 each.
Click to expand...

In those days, that's all I wanted :p Nothing but Fatal Fury, World Heros, Art of Fighting, King of Fighters, etc.
 
Domingo said:
In those days, that's all I wanted :p Nothing but Fatal Fury, World Heros, Art of Fighting, King of Fighters, etc.
Click to expand...

True dat. You forgot Samurai showdown. All fantastic games.
Doing the Ultimate special move in AOF was epic.
 
as I mentioned in the best console thread, I had a friend that owned a neogeo and it was the only one I every saw. hands down it was the best hardware at that time and the games were perfect to the arcade. I had another friend that was a console collector before it was cool and even he didn't have one.
now back on topic...

the resent new re the nx is that it will be more powerful than the current versions but they are not trying to beat either of the new systems. and no vr until it catches on better.
 
pendragon1 said:
as I mentioned in the best console thread, I had a friend that owned a neogeo and it was the only one I every saw. hands down it was the best hardware at that time and the games were perfect to the arcade. I had another friend that was a console collector before it was cool and even he didn't have one.
now back on topic...

the resent new re the nx is that it will be more powerful than the current versions but they are not trying to beat either of the new systems. and no vr until it catches on better.
Click to expand...

Well now Nintendo is screwed because both Sony and MS are "refreshing" and Nintendo's big plan was contingent on them play by the console rules. Notice how when we first heard about the NX it was I think a bit more powerful than the XB1, now they are saying power doesn't matter.
For a brief second Nintendo was, on paper, back in the game. Now they are falling back into the "we innovate" rhetoric and planning for failure.
We will see Nintendo as a software developer only in the next 10 years. Same as Sega.
 
that is a possibility or at least drop the console and keep the portables but maybe neither. did you see the Pokémon go demo? official Pokémon on smartphones. I think I remember people talking about a move like that last year...
 
pendragon1 said:
that is a possibility or at least drop the console and keep the portables but maybe neither. did you see the Pokémon go demo? official Pokémon on smartphones. I think I remember people talking about a move like that last year...
Click to expand...

Interesting thought, but I think that all portables are being killed by smartphones and even nintendo can smell the blood in the water.

I think Nintendo's bag of tricks is empty. The only really cool direction to go would have been VR and they are not even in that game.
The hints they are dropping are disheartening. I hear them giving up. I expect a 1080P console of PS4 power with a dumb controller. Kind of like the WiiU with nads.

They are going to have to really, REALLY get funky to catch the attention of the consumer.
I gope they can do it because consoles will be very boring when/if we have only PS4 and XB1 out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top