darkSpyro

https://www.reddit.com/r/ninte...ompete_against/


This isn't a good sign if it's true. It'll turn off a lot of 3rd party interest. That's one of the reasons the Wii U didn't sell. Nintendo says there is 3rd party supporters, but it could die down when the NX releases, JUST LIKE WITH THE WII U. It doesn't need to rival PS4 and XB1 but it needs to have equal or very close power to both consoles to get 3rd party interest.


The good thing is that there is no source so it might be false.

People need to realise that Nintendo isn't really ever competing with Sony and Microsoft anymore, they just do their own thing. They don't really need to compete with them, since 3DS and Amiibo are such strong sources of revenue anyway.

They also said that the NX won't have any VR stuff, and instead, Nintendo wants to focus on eSports. This is shown very directly in how Bill Trinen of the Nintendo Treehouse is actually competing in the Smash Wii U tournament at EVO this year, and is doing so independently as far as we can tell.

I'd like to stress that this is a completely source-less rumour, so please take it with a grain (or cellar) of salt.

And even if true, "power" isn't necessarily the deciding factor when it comes to third parties. Ease of porting (which is obviously affected by power but not as much as you might think - especially now that there's not an extremely huge power gap anymore) and mainly sales numbers are way more important. If Nintendo can capture a large enough audience (which they can probably only do through another awesome gimmick or exclusive feature, not by having similar power to the PS4/Xbox One that many people have already bought), I'm sure many third parties will want to support that market.

I'm not going to take much from this. I really wish people would stop talking about the NX. People need to realize that the only reason why they ever even said anything about it was to prevent the internet from throwing a fit at the false idea that they'd be switching to mobile games. A sort of "relax we're not leaving dedicated platforms, and here's proof". But all the discussion and speculation about the NX when Nintendo has repeatedly said they won't talk about it makes it feel as if the Wii U is practically already dead, mere months after I bought it.

HOWEVER

I disagree with the idea of "power doesn't make a successful console". Yeah graphics aren't everything but the truth of the matter is that a lot of third parties won't want to develop or port their games to a significantly weaker console. DICE and Crytek skipped the Wii U during the development of Battlefield 4 and Crysis 3 respectively in part because the system wouldn't be able to handle the game at it's truest potential. And these games are only getting more graphically advanced as time goes on. Even Call of Duty, while having some titles on the Wii U, eventually skipped the system altogether starting with Advanced Warfare (which, mind you, was ported to 360/PS3 by different devs, not Sledgehammer themselves).

People often give third party console devs flack as it is for often not bothering much when porting to the PC. Arkham Knight is just the latest example of that, where it was bugged and locked at 30 fps to match the PS4/XBO versions. Now imagine them trying to port the game to a significantly weaker system like the Wii U. They'd have to heavily downgrade the game, and they'd probably still have severe frame rate issues.
Project CARS is a game that, at the start, was going to come out for the Wii U alongside other systems. But the reason there's still no Wii U version (and likely won't be) is because they have such troubles downgrading the graphical quality of the game to get it to run at a stable frame rate on Wii U. Nintendo asks for 60 fps, but they're reportedly getting around 20. There's only so much downgrading you can do before it starts to look lousy.

So yes I do think that Nintendo should seriously try to match the other consoles (if not even exceed them) in graphical quality. If you're constantly lagging behind people aren't going to want to go through the trouble of porting their game, which in turn can lower the install base because "I should get the other system since it has what I want", and the cycle continues. And this time around the Wii U had a fairly normal control scheme, so it's not like wacky controls get in the way of porting like the Wiimote did. Nintendo has lovely IPs and they're absolutely the #1 reason to invest in a Nintendo system. But third party support is something the company needs and they can't keep lagging behind if they want it.

Quote: CAV

I'm not going to take much from this. I really wish people would stop talking about the NX. People need to realize that the only reason why they ever even said anything about it was to prevent the internet from throwing a fit at the false idea that they'd be switching to mobile games. A sort of "relax we're not leaving dedicated platforms, and here's proof". But all the discussion and speculation about the NX when Nintendo has repeatedly said they won't talk about it makes it feel as if the Wii U is practically already dead, mere months after I bought it.

HOWEVER

I disagree with the idea of "power doesn't make a successful console". Yeah graphics aren't everything but the truth of the matter is that a lot of third parties won't want to develop or port their games to a significantly weaker console. DICE and Crytek skipped the Wii U during the development of Battlefield 4 and Crysis 3 respectively in part because the system wouldn't be able to handle the game at it's truest potential. And these games are only getting more graphically advanced as time goes on. Even Call of Duty, while having some titles on the Wii U, eventually skipped the system altogether starting with Advanced Warfare (which, mind you, was ported to 360/PS3 by different devs, not Sledgehammer themselves).

People often give third party console devs flack as it is for often not bothering much when porting to the PC. Arkham Knight is just the latest example of that, where it was bugged and locked at 30 fps to match the PS4/XBO versions. Now imagine them trying to port the game to a significantly weaker system like the Wii U. They'd have to heavily downgrade the game, and they'd probably still have severe frame rate issues.
Project CARS is a game that, at the start, was going to come out for the Wii U alongside other systems. But the reason there's still no Wii U version (and likely won't be) is because they have such troubles downgrading the graphical quality of the game to get it to run at a stable frame rate on Wii U. Nintendo asks for 60 fps, but they're reportedly getting around 20. There's only so much downgrading you can do before it starts to look lousy.

So yes I do think that Nintendo should seriously try to match the other consoles (if not even exceed them) in graphical quality. If you're constantly lagging behind people aren't going to want to go through the trouble of porting their game, which in turn can lower the install base because "I should get the other system since it has what I want", and the cycle continues. And this time around the Wii U had a fairly normal control scheme, so it's not like wacky controls get in the way of porting like the Wiimote did. Nintendo has lovely IPs and they're absolutely the #1 reason to invest in a Nintendo system. But third party support is something the company needs and they can't keep lagging behind if they want it.

Thank you! My exact thoughts!

Actually Crytek had Crysis 3 running on Wii U, and were close to launching it. It was cancelled because Nintendo and EA fell out with each other (EA wanted EA Origin on Wii U, Nintendo said no).

http://www.gamespot.com/articl...e/1100-6404763/

Overall I think Nintendo is fine. To be quite frank, I don't think having a more powerful console than Sony and Microsoft would automatically improve sales over what the Wii U is having. Nintendo is better off doing their own thing, because their games inherently don't compete with Microsoft and Sony's anyway. They aim for a different demographic, being kids and families, while putting out a few more niche games for older audiences. They need to make the cheapest console of the three to keep that demographic. Furthermore, their games really don't need ultra powered graphics because most of them are cartoony, and Nintendo can realistically only make specs with their in-house games in mind for the most part.

For those who don't know, the Tomb Raider reboot, which had hyper realistic graphics, sold millions of copies, yet it was considered a failure - because they poured too much money into the graphics.

Nintendo is actively trying to avoid that kind of situation.

And to a degree, many developers are talking out of their ass when they say the Wii U is too weak for them, because:



This is a Wii U exclusive game from an Indie studio.

Fanbase, Power, ease of use to develop to, and support from the manufacturer are all reasons to develop to it. I'd argue that Nintendo makes it very difficult on at least two of these requirements...which shys away developers which impact fanbase etc.

I'll wait for information at E3 2016 when Nintendo actually announces what it'll be.

Honestly, I'm kind of disappointed about Nintendo not embracing VR currently. Look at how great this could be! Games like a new Metroid Prime, Pikmin, or Wii Sports would work perfectly with it. I think it's a shame.

HIHD, I'd add "RUMOR:" in front of the topic title since this isn't confirmed yet. It might give people the wrong idea.

Quote: LunarDistortion

I'll wait for information at E3 2016 when Nintendo actually announces what it'll be.

Honestly, I'm kind of disappointed about Nintendo not embracing VR currently. Look at how great this could be! Games like a new Metroid Prime, Pikmin, or Wii Sports would work perfectly with it. I think it's a shame.

HIHD, I'd add "RUMOR:" in front of the topic title since this isn't confirmed yet. It might give people the wrong idea.

I've tried F-Zero GX on Oculus, and it's great.

However, Nintendo have a perfectly valid reason to ignore VR - Nintendo have always been the kings of couch multiplayer, and VR doesn't reasonably accommodate for that with current tech. As they've stated countless times, they prefer to encourage social gaming experiences, and VR right now doesn't accommodate a truly social gaming experience that everyone can get involved in. And implementing it just for singleplayer experiences is unnecessary, since none of their singleplayer games require it. VR as it stands is still a novelty, not even third party developers are really behind it yet (so it wouldn't help their third party situation at all, in fact, it could worsen it).

There is no point developing something so expensive when A) it's going to make their system more expensive on the consumer just for what is currently a novelty (Microsoft initially made this mistake with the Xbox One and Kinect), and B) it doesn't even properly accommodate their most prominent and popular game genre, being couch multiplayer games like Smash and Mario Kart.

Quote: sonicbrawler182

Quote: LunarDistortion

I'll wait for information at E3 2016 when Nintendo actually announces what it'll be.

Honestly, I'm kind of disappointed about Nintendo not embracing VR currently. Look at how great this could be! Games like a new Metroid Prime, Pikmin, or Wii Sports would work perfectly with it. I think it's a shame.

HIHD, I'd add "RUMOR:" in front of the topic title since this isn't confirmed yet. It might give people the wrong idea.

I've tried F-Zero GX on Oculus, and it's great.

However, Nintendo have a perfectly valid reason to ignore VR - Nintendo have always been the kings of couch multiplayer, and VR doesn't reasonably accommodate for that with current tech. As they've stated countless times, they prefer to encourage social gaming experiences, and VR right now doesn't accommodate a truly social gaming experience that everyone can get involved in. And implementing it just for singleplayer experiences is unnecessary, since none of their singleplayer games require it. VR as it stands is still a novelty, not even third party developers are really behind it yet (so it wouldn't help their third party situation at all, in fact, it could worsen it).

There is no point developing something so expensive when A) it's going to make their system more expensive on the consumer just for what is currently a novelty (Microsoft initially made this mistake with the Xbox One and Kinect), and B) it doesn't even properly accommodate their most prominent and popular game genre, being couch multiplayer games like Smash and Mario Kart.

I completely understand, and in some ways kinda want them to wait for VR to get more advanced and easier to program for, but I still think it's a bit of a shame that we won't get it for a long while, if ever.

the wiiu will do fine and nx will not replace the wiiu either. there is more than enough power in the wiiu to make good games. when we know games like 'the last of us' was released on the ps3, and i am sure the xb360 have good games that can be compared to the ps3 'the last of us' too. the thing is the wiiu is as strong power wise as the xb360/ps3 and you dont need xbone/ps4 graphics to make a good game. splatoon, nintendos latest new ip prove that... all these third party developers that talk crap about the wiiu and dont want to support the wiiu, can all **** off. nintendo is doing fine without them and i think its good we dont get another cod or whatever on the wiiu. it just make what the wiiu have to offer different, and i am totaly okay with nintendo doing their own thing... i dont want a third sony or microsoft there is enough of what they offer already...

Nobody wants to downgrade their **** to look like it was build on a PS2 just to get it to run on a Wii U.

Now when all you people saying power doesn't matter but ***** when there's no third party support, don't act like it's a surprise.