Wii HD in 2011?

[DazzeL]

I think you misjudge the market Darkjak. The people you described there just aren't buying Wii's on mass. The casual market isn't just mum's and old ladies. It's a (very few) old people who already had a passing interst in games or mum's who have had games around them all their lives - i.e. the kid's or boyfriend playing them. I can almost guarantee that 90% of Wii's userbase had already experienced a video game to some extent.

 

The key then is not in the timing of the release of "Wii2". It's in the marketing - to make current owners think that the new console is better and that everyone else is also switching over - and in the pricing. It has to represent good value, just as the Wii did when compared favourably to the competition. Nintendo now has the very clever advantage of being able to drastically improve, and cost effectively, probably the most obvious element of any game (especially in marketing terms) - the visuals. Even the most casual of gamers can appreciate when graphics simply look pretty.

[Emasher]

I believe Nintendo released statistics that Most Wiis have actually been purchased by the demographic usually considered "Hardcore". The casuals just play the ones that have been bought by other people.

 

Now lets look at why a lot of "Hardcore Gamers" (We generally know this demographic as Chavs and Fadders, since a lot of real Hardcore Gamers either have bought a Wii, have reasons not to, or are fanboys of another console) don't want a Wii.

 

*Lesser Visuals.

*Their friends think its uncool.

*They've never played anything that wasn't an FPS game.

 

The Wii HD's visuals will probably be closer to the competition's.

It will probably end up being marketed to the core a little better.

Good chance there will be more FPS games.

[darkjak]

I believe Nintendo released statistics that Most Wiis have actually been purchased by the demographic usually considered "Hardcore". The casuals just play the ones that have been bought by other people.

 

Now lets look at why a lot of "Hardcore Gamers" (We generally know this demographic as Chavs and Fadders, since a lot of real Hardcore Gamers either have bought a Wii, have reasons not to, or are fanboys of another console) don't want a Wii.

 

*Lesser Visuals.

*Their friends think its uncool.

*They've never played anything that wasn't an FPS game.

 

The Wii HD's visuals will probably be closer to the competition's.

It will probably end up being marketed to the core a little better.

Good chance there will be more FPS games.

 

I can say that I know the people whom aspire to become game developers, and they can be considered to be the most core or even hardcore of players out there. Why do they dislike the Wii? Not because it's uncool, or because they've never played anything beyond FPS's. As a matter of fact, most of them think that the Wii is in theory the best FPS console out there (if it had HD and better options for online communications it would be better than the PC). Very few of the games that there's a buzz arround get released for the Wii. The only Wii game that I can recall that there's been a buzz arround is Smash Bros Brawl, but about half the students from my year think that Melee is better (I personally think that they're just whining because they have to relearn to play the game).

And for other formats? Bioshock, MGS4, Soul Calibur, Assassins Creed, Gran Turismo, Red Alert 2, Army of Two, Gears of War, Fallout 3.

 

What makes people prefer other formats is what I said before: too few core games. I'm not talking about one AAA exclusive every month. I'm talking about AAA games not being "exclusively NOT for Wii". To port most "multiformat" titles for Wii requires different graphics engines, 3D-models, physics engines, plus that some level designs just aren't possible to acheive on the Wii. Making a Wii port of, let's say MGS4 would be very costly and time consuming.

 

What Nintendo need to do is to release the Wiis successor WAY ahead of the PS4, so that the third parties will release all the big PS3/360 titles for the Wii as well. Either that or they wait with releasing it untill the very second they can manufacture a console that can match the PS4 at an affordable price (about 2 years after that format will be out I think). Releasing a console that can match the PS3 a year or two after the Xbox 720 will be released won't please the core. There has to be some point in the formats lifespan when it feels current, and you won't really be missing out on the latest cool games. THAT will please the core, which as previously stated, are the main console buying demographic.

Like I said, to persuade the casuals to buy the Wii2, you have to make sure to release it as late as possible. The casuals don't want to put out too much cash on a new format. Heavy marketing will of course be necessary, but even that won't make many casuals understand. There are young women here whom will ask if you mean Ray-Ban and CK when you talk about blu-ray or HD and won't be able to differ Crysis from Goldeneye.

[Emasher]

I don't see the Wii HD being way ahead of the other next gen consoles (Can we call them that now?), but I can see it being on par. I think MS for sure is going to hold off in terms of power and perhaps sony too, I mean, thats what "Nintendo did".

[Hellfire]

There we go, you're on a game designer course, therefore you know "the people whom aspire to become game developers". Lots of people aspire to become game developers, your colleagues aren't the people who will shape the entire future of the industry. I'll leave it at that, no harm intended, I'm sure it was just mis-writing anyway.

 

If your buddies think that, it just shows they're mostly misinformed frat gamers who wanna make the "cool stuff", because if they were really with the right mindset and minimally serious they wouldn't just look at "the buzz". Because you see lots of people talking about Call of Duty and Soul Caliburs, but the other games are still out there: De Blob, Wario, Disaster, Boom Blox, Z&W, Punch Out, S&P2, EO2, the FIFAs the TWs, etc etc. They're not what the hip cats are talking about? Tough luck, because the hip cats need to realise the market doesn't revolve around them, it revolves around a much, much larger crowd.

 

This "buzz" is completely inconsequential, we're talking mostly about accompanied by "core" gamers and this huge internet frat boy mentality (which I absolutely loathe and is everywhere) and is in great part a result of huge huge financial investments that only give return if games sell millions and millions, while you see "small" games selling quietly for months and months, giving actual money to devs. And these games exist. There's quite a number of them, but people still like to ignore them, pretend they don't exist, and keep saying to themselves "Wii has no games, Wii games don't sell, Wii has no AAA, AAA, AAA, epic, hardcore mumble mumble" back and forth in a corner.

 

The ammount of devs and publishers that can afford to risk these heavy hitters is minimal, relying on them, will leave us with a handful of publishers and devs (which already started to happen a few years, lots of studios mergins and closing). Big boys wanna make multi-million dollar games? Go ahead, you have the money. You can make some more, most times you even lose it, but hey what the hell you have money. The others don't. Things are not black and white, as most people but them, hell, we have the whole freakin' spectrum right here, looking at one part of it while looking at the others with the corner of your eye won't get you anywhere.

 

The last panel seems somewhat appropriate. Not directed to you in particular, just to what's going on.

 

Nintendo's strategy is working. Big time. Bigger than anything we've seen, competitors didn't predict it, they couldn't catch up, analysts in their eternal enlightenment couldn't realize it until it was obvious and a couple of kids scattered throughout the internet (me included) and some game designer courses certainly don't know jack in order to say with the least amount of certainty what they need to do in order to achieve success. Because in the end, the ones who keep achieving it and raising objectives and constantly meeting them are the ones who know and they're the only ones who we can be certain to know what's to be done. At least for their sake.

 

I remember the casuals appeared when PS1 launched, oh how fun it was when the hardcore made fun of them, and then Nintendo was the underdog the bastion of hardcore, but the others were still casuals, it wouldn't last. It did. They started playing more and more, buying more consoles, expanding the audience, expanding the industry and then buying a PS2. ANd after PS2, many still bough PS1s and PS1 games. And after PS3 many still buy PS2 and PS2 games. See the parallels? Difference is, Nintendo has cash, loads of it, they can sustain this even more than Sony. So, the leading company in the market with a bajillion years of success can afford, without any doubt to do exactly what's expected and carry on normal console life cycles to later release a new console. As always. And now, suddenly, because some guys found out "Hey Nintendo is investing money! They'll launch a new console after 5 years!" (courtesy of General Obvious- he was promoted), people are talking like it's something out of the ordinary when it's not.

[Zechs Merquise]

What Nintendo need to do is to release the Wiis successor WAY ahead of the PS4, so that the third parties will release all the big PS3/360 titles for the Wii as well. Either that or they wait with releasing it untill the very second they can manufacture a console that can match the PS4 at an affordable price (about 2 years after that format will be out I think). Releasing a console that can match the PS3 a year or two after the Xbox 720 will be released won't please the core. There has to be some point in the formats lifespan when it feels current, and you won't really be missing out on the latest cool games. THAT will please the core, which as previously stated, are the main console buying demographic.

 

Like I said, to persuade the casuals to buy the Wii2, you have to make sure to release it as late as possible. The casuals don't want to put out too much cash on a new format. Heavy marketing will of course be necessary, but even that won't make many casuals understand. There are young women here whom will ask if you mean Ray-Ban and CK when you talk about blu-ray or HD and won't be able to differ Crysis from Goldeneye.

 

What the Wii2 will need to do to beat the PS4? You're off your head. What will the PS4 need to do to beat the Wii2 is more the question you should be asking, along with the bigger one of 'will there be a PS4'.

 

At the end of the last generation, SONY looked so in control, it would have been unthinkable for them to slip - or would it? Look at them now, losing 1.25 billion dollars a year on the gaming front. The largest operating loss of any games producer. They're not clawing that back and making the PS3 a profit. That's because they've totally pandered to the idiotic 'core gamer = everything' mentality.

 

 

This "buzz" is completely inconsequential, we're talking mostly about accompanied by "core" gamers and this huge internet frat boy mentality (which I absolutely loathe and is everywhere) and is in great part a result of huge huge financial investments that only give return if games sell millions and millions, while you see "small" games selling quietly for months and months, giving actual money to devs. And these games exist. There's quite a number of them, but people still like to ignore them, pretend they don't exist, and keep saying to themselves "Wii has no games, Wii games don't sell, Wii has no AAA, AAA, AAA, epic, hardcore mumble mumble" back and forth in a corner.

 

The ammount of devs and publishers that can afford to risk these heavy hitters is minimal, relying on them, will leave us with a handful of publishers and devs (which already started to happen a few years, lots of studios mergins and closing). Big boys wanna make multi-million dollar games? Go ahead, you have the money. You can make some more, most times you even lose it, but hey what the hell you have money. The others don't. Things are not black and white, as most people but them, hell, we have the whole freakin' spectrum right here, looking at one part of it while looking at the others with the corner of your eye won't get you anywhere.

 

I couldn't have said it better. The reason the PS3 has been a total and utter flop is because of this mentality.

 

It's a system that has had huge production costs meaning it makes a loss on EVERY unit sold. It's system that costs a lot to develop for so developers don't make as much per release so the loss on the consoles aren't as easily recouped by software sales as they used to be.

 

Also as Nintendo released a really cheap and affordable console it has caused premature price drops which has meant Sony has lost even more as they're taking a bigger hit everytime a console is sold.

 

As Hellfire also said, it's this 'core gamer' mentality and drive for the most amazingly over the top development and production costs which has driven many studios out of business and even the big boys like EA are struggling and failing to turn a profit.

 

If this trend continues, Nintendo could well be the only survivor...

[SpinesN]

As I see it in the event the WiiHD is true, it will either be a completely new development platform, but not the exclusive development platform for nintendo. That is to say, a "Third Pillar". Or it will be a cosmetic update to the wii ie. hardware scaler, more storage, or any other change that doesn't affect the chipset. Reason being is that nintendo has built a fanatic market with the wii platform, they are still bringing in tons of money with it and creating a new platform would incure more cost on the buyer and thus you get less demand.

[darkjak]

What the Wii2 will need to do to beat the PS4? You're off your head. What will the PS4 need to do to beat the Wii2 is more the question you should be asking, along with the bigger one of 'will there be a PS4'.

There most certainly will be a PS4, as the years will go by the technology in the PS3 will become cheaper to manufacture. Sony made a loss on each unit sold with the PS2, untill they launched the slimline, which earns them money on each unit. Like I said before, the PS3 is likely to have a longer lifespan than usual (2015-ish), and the Xbox 360 as well.

 

At the end of the last generation, SONY looked so in control, it would have been unthinkable for them to slip - or would it? Look at them now, losing 1.25 billion dollars a year on the gaming front. The largest operating loss of any games producer. They're not clawing that back and making the PS3 a profit. That's because they've totally pandered to the idiotic 'core gamer = everything' mentality.

The PS3 is currently selling better than the XB360. If you don't think Sony aren't in control, you're mistaking. The Wii is doing much better than expected, but I'm still convinced that they were aware of the big losses they would be making in the early years. And of course, Sony have a TOO core oriented mentality.

 

As Hellfire also said, it's this 'core gamer' mentality and drive for the most amazingly over the top development and production costs which has driven many studios out of business and even the big boys like EA are struggling and failing to turn a profit.

For the love of christ, how many times have I said this: THE GRAPHICS HAVE JACK SHIT TO DO WHETHER A GAME IS CORE OR NOT, IT'S GAMEPLAY!

 

If this trend continues, Nintendo could well be the only survivor...

That is a possibility, and if that's what it takes to give us all the latest interresting games, then that's what I'm hoping for.

 

 

 

There we go, you're on a game designer course, therefore you know "the people whom aspire to become game developers". Lots of people aspire to become game developers, your colleagues aren't the people who will shape the entire future of the industry. I'll leave it at that, no harm intended, I'm sure it was just mis-writing anyway.

 

If your buddies think that, it just shows they're mostly misinformed frat gamers who wanna make the "cool stuff", because if they were really with the right mindset and minimally serious they wouldn't just look at "the buzz". Because you see lots of people talking about Call of Duty and Soul Caliburs, but the other games are still out there: De Blob, Wario, Disaster, Boom Blox, Z&W, Punch Out, S&P2, EO2, the FIFAs the TWs, etc etc. They're not what the hip cats are talking about? Tough luck, because the hip cats need to realise the market doesn't revolve around them, it revolves around a much, much larger crowd.

Where the frick did I write that we were going to be able to develop whatever games we want? Where did I write that we are the ones who will be shaping the entire friggin' industry? What I was writing, as an answer to your post was that I know the corest of the fucking core, whom can list the rules and stats of every friggin' unit in Dungeons and Dragons in their sleep. And these people don't criticise the Wii because it's graphically inferior or because their friends don't think it's cool, but because they want the big quality games.

Yes, we do want to make core AAA games first and foremost, but we do realise that the chances of being able to do that are quite small, at least at the start of our careers, but nontheless, what one dreams of when entering the industry is just that: great games.

 

This "buzz" is completely inconsequential, we're talking mostly about accompanied by "core" gamers and this huge internet frat boy mentality (which I absolutely loathe and is everywhere) and is in great part a result of huge huge financial investments that only give return if games sell millions and millions, while you see "small" games selling quietly for months and months, giving actual money to devs. And these games exist. There's quite a number of them, but people still like to ignore them, pretend they don't exist, and keep saying to themselves "Wii has no games, Wii games don't sell, Wii has no AAA, AAA, AAA, epic, hardcore mumble mumble" back and forth in a corner.

A game doesent have to have a AAA budget to be core, I hope you realise that. Mega Man 9 is a very core oriented game for example, and I don't think that it had a multi-milion dollar budget.

 

 

The ammount of devs and publishers that can afford to risk these heavy hitters is minimal, relying on them, will leave us with a handful of publishers and devs (which already started to happen a few years, lots of studios mergins and closing). Big boys wanna make multi-million dollar games? Go ahead, you have the money. You can make some more, most times you even lose it, but hey what the hell you have money. The others don't. Things are not black and white, as most people but them, hell, we have the whole freakin' spectrum right here, looking at one part of it while looking at the others with the corner of your eye won't get you anywhere.

Where have I been questioning this? I just said that I want Nintendo to release the Wii 2 at such a point in time when it'll be easy to port the contemporary big games. I have no idea what you all are whining about. I think that we all want those games we are missing out on.

 

 

Nintendo's strategy is working. Big time. Bigger than anything we've seen, competitors didn't predict it, they couldn't catch up, analysts in their eternal enlightenment couldn't realize it until it was obvious and a couple of kids scattered throughout the internet (me included) and some game designer courses certainly don't know jack in order to say with the least amount of certainty what they need to do in order to achieve success. Because in the end, the ones who keep achieving it and raising objectives and constantly meeting them are the ones who know and they're the only ones who we can be certain to know what's to be done. At least for their sake.

 

 

I remember the casuals appeared when PS1 launched, oh how fun it was when the hardcore made fun of them, and then Nintendo was the underdog the bastion of hardcore, but the others were still casuals, it wouldn't last. It did. They started playing more and more, buying more consoles, expanding the audience, expanding the industry and then buying a PS2. ANd after PS2, many still bough PS1s and PS1 games. And after PS3 many still buy PS2 and PS2 games. See the parallels? Difference is, Nintendo has cash, loads of it, they can sustain this even more than Sony. So, the leading company in the market with a bajillion years of success can afford, without any doubt to do exactly what's expected and carry on normal console life cycles to later release a new console. As always. And now, suddenly, because some guys found out "Hey Nintendo is investing money! They'll launch a new console after 5 years!" (courtesy of General Obvious- he was promoted), people are talking like it's something out of the ordinary when it's not.

 

Sony NEVER EVER were good to the casuals, they were good for the MAINSTREAM. There's a difference there. It's the to a big part the mainstream that buy all the friggin first person shooters and sports games. Of course noone thought that Sony could succede, but they did because they attracted the people whom previously were "too cool" to play videogames. It's gone so much time that these mainstreamers have become a part of the core gaming demographic. Why? Because the mainstream games in the early PSOne lifespan were shovelware, and because the mainstreamers started to play more and more advanced games. The casuals on the other hand keep buying shovelware, and REFUSE to learn anything more advanced than Warioware.

 

I suggest you all read my last post one more time before you start talking bullshit about my mentality. I mean preciselly what I write, nothing more, nothing less!

[Zechs Merquise]

There most certainly will be a PS4, as the years will go by the technology in the PS3 will become cheaper to manufacture. Sony made a loss on each unit sold with the PS2, untill they launched the slimline, which earns them money on each unit. Like I said before, the PS3 is likely to have a longer lifespan than usual (2015-ish), and the Xbox 360 as well.

 

Well that may not be the case at all. With development costs so much higher for the PS3 its software needs to sell in much greater quantities to turn a profit. Plus with the early price cuts SONY have been forced into making they will be losing money on the PS3 for the foreseeable future. Plus, losses of over $1.25 billion are massive, much bigger than Microsoft (who have deeper pockets). If they carry on like that there is nothing certain about a PS4.

 

The PS3 is currently selling better than the XB360. If you don't think Sony aren't in control, you're mistaking. The Wii is doing much better than expected, but I'm still convinced that they were aware of the big losses they would be making in the early years. And of course, Sony have a TOO core oriented mentality.

 

Wrong, the PS3 is not outselling the 360 in either America or the Europe. In fact the 360 outsold the PS3 in JAPAN in September! Also the 360 price cut I think the 360 will continue to outsell the PS3 over Christmas and has a stronger software line up.

 

EDIT: http://www.videogamer.com/news/30-09-2008-9511.html

Above is a link to the 360 outselling the PS3 2-1 in the UK.

 

So SONY are posting massive loses, have sold less consoles than the other two, and are being outsold at time of writing. How on earth does that make them in control???

 

For the love of christ, how many times have I said this: THE GRAPHICS HAVE JACK SHIT TO DO WHETHER A GAME IS CORE OR NOT, IT'S GAMEPLAY!

 

Is that why the main talking point of the PS3 are the graphics? It's had on exclusive game that has really stood out!

[Hellfire]

Again, I said it was not meant as an attack, but you wrote "the people who aspire to become game developers" and as you say, you view them as the core of the core and I find that wrong and disturbing. And, like I said, the mentality wasn't about, you, it was about what I see out there. I specifically said that, don't try to turn this personal, because no one's attacking you.

 

And Sony was good to the casuals, the notion of casual just changed now. A few years back the playstation crowd were in fact the casual gamers, a lot of them are now called or considered core. We're talking about the guys who soiled themselves when they saw guns, blood, etc... And even later, Eye Toy, Buzz, Singstar, etc... You can't say Sony didn't appeal to the new casual.

 

And like I said, there are a lot of AAA games out there for Wii, and without doubt because of the gameplay not the graphics, which is obvious and that's exactly what I was talking about, the refusal to accept these games exist.

[darkjak]

Is that why the main talking point of the PS3 are the graphics? It's had on exclusive game that has really stood out!

 

The main talking point of the PS3 is graphics. Well, what the f**k else can Sony fanboys say to make an investment of 400 euros? The PS3 hasn't had many exclusives worth mentioning, HOWEVER, there have been lots of games for both the PS3 and the 360 which didn't come out on the Wii. Those games are the talking point of the other formats. Had the Wii been getting RE5, Soul Calibur 4, Bioshock, Assassins Creed, GTA 4 and the other "multi format" titles, noone would be complaining. I know plenty of people whom buy the Wii version of the games that do make it to the Wii, even though they have HDTV's and one of the other formats. I myself am thinking of buying a 360 to get these games, not to experience mindblowing graphics or any BS like that. Like I said, the core, the REAL core don't bitch about the Wiis graphic, they just dislike not being able to play the latest games.

 

 

And as I said, I think Sony are in control, not of the industry, but of their own business. I believe that they did count on development costs rising, and making losses in the formats early life. And I do believe that in a year or so, there'll be a new version of the PS3 with simplified chipsets which enable a pricedrop AND making a small profit on each unit. Sony will probably also earn cash on downloadable content and for Playstation Network.

[Hellfire]

Well yeah, someone who really is into games wants to play all the good games and that requires having all the consoles. The same is valid the other way, with just a 360/PS3 you miss out on amazing Wii games. It's quite obvious that if Wii could manage (although it could manage some) multiplatform titles that come to 360 and PS3 it would be lovely, but it's not much different than before and totally expected. I advise you, if you have the money obviously, to buy another console, because it gives you the whole experience. I love Wii60.

 

Sony isn't in control though, they're in deep shit and put themselves between a rock and a hardplace. Their saving "grace" is the PSP and the fact that blu ray won the format war. Of course console manufacturing will get cheaper and I honestly think the only way for them to get out at least a little of the mess they're in is to make PS3 last a long long time as their main console. Which seems about right, it was a huge investment and power wise it's more than enough to last more years than usual.

[Diageo]

Wasn't this about Wii HD instead of SONY, 360, current wii...

[Zechs Merquise]

I don't see why people seem to think the PS3 will have a longer lifespan than other consoles. A console's lifepsan is governed by 2 things:

 

1) It's technology

2) The size of it's user base

 

When a console becomes outdated by new technology it shortens it's lifespan. For example, I don't see much difference in power between the 360 and the PS3. When (or if) Microsoft release a new console it will be more powerful still and make the 360 and PS3 redundant as the place for cutting edge (graphically speaking) games.

 

Secondly the user base - if the user base of a console is significantly large, then it's lifespan will be extended. For example, if when the PS3 came out 50% of PS2 users packed away their old console, that still leaves 60 million PS2s in active use and a user base still worth developing for. In fact if 75% of the PS2 users had packed them away it would leave 30 million active units, bigger than the Gamecube's user base at it's height!

 

As the PS3 isn't really anymore advanced than the 360 it won't outlast this generation through it's technology, and as it's user base is the smallest of the three consoles it won't live on with it's own momentum as the PS2 has done.

 

The Wii is likely to have it's lifespan shortened through the technology factor, but this will be balanced out by it's large userbase (and cheap development costs) which will still make game development profitable.

[Emasher]

Hopefully that means all the shitty ubisoft ect. crap will stay on the Wii for a while and we'll get effort put into Wii HD games.

[DCK]

The Wii is likely to have it's lifespan shortened through the technology factor, but this will be balanced out by it's large userbase (and cheap development costs) which will still make game development profitable.

If you consider 'technology' just the reworked GameCube hardware, then it would be a lifespan shortening factor. If you consider the controls and their appeal as part of the technology, I don't think the technology is really an issue.

 

The only way it could be a shortening factor is when Microsoft or Sony releases their next gen console with a similar controller. Then the Wii's ten-year old hardware will certainly limit it.

 

For that reason alone, I think Nintendo will make a lot more effort into making the Wii2 a powerful console than they did with the Wii, simply because the competition will be following them into controller innovations. I think the Wii2 will be a lot closer to its competitors graphically than the Wii is now, maybe even topping them if Nintendo is patient enough.

[Grazza]

What it boils down to, I think, is: 1) how many years Nintendo can keep the Wii as a massive craze, selling out every Christmas; and 2) when Nintendo decide they can make profit on new hardware.

 

Animal Crossing should ensure big sales Christmas 2008, Wii Sports Resort 2009 and 2010. I'm hoping for Wii Sports 2 on Wii 2 in 2011.

 

I know Wii software sales are good and that the "casual" gamer may not find the Wii outdated by 2011 (if ever), but that doesn't mean they won't be swept up in the marketing to buy a Wii 2. After all, people have enough money to spend £180 every five years.

 

I also think sales may be slowing slightly (at last!), as three UK shops I know of have knocked £20 off or done good bundles recently. I'm hoping this is the thin end of the wedge, and we get a proper price cut in 2009, as I want to buy one and can afford one, but I've always thought it's worth £130.

[Guest Maase]

I don't believe in this rumour...

 

Believe me, Nintendo will only decide to make another console when:

 

1) The sales of the Wii go down (which i don't believe will happen in something like 5 years from now)

 

2) A new and completely inovator technology comes, and Myamoto does a crazy idea with it

[Phube]

I don't believe in this rumour...

 

Believe me, Nintendo will only decide to release another console when:

 

1) The sales of the Wii go down (which i don't believe will happen in something like 5 years from now)

 

2) A new and completely inovator technology comes, and Myamoto does a crazy idea with it

 

Fixed!

 

Nintendo decide to MAKE their next console the second their previous one is released. It's the way the worl works!

[DCK]

They're just generally figuring out some guidelines for the Wii2, I doubt there's any actual development. The console is very far from being 'made'.

 

Nintendo R&D is probably figuring out what new control methods they're going to implement and testing some stuff. I think most of their work will be focussed on the handheld market at the moment though. The DSi didn't come out of the blue.

[McPhee]

Well that may not be the case at all. With development costs so much higher for the PS3 its software needs to sell in much greater quantities to turn a profit. Plus with the early price cuts SONY have been forced into making they will be losing money on the PS3 for the foreseeable future. Plus, losses of over $1.25 billion are massive, much bigger than Microsoft (who have deeper pockets). If they carry on like that there is nothing certain about a PS4.

 

Losses of over $1.25 billion on the PS3, but just think how much money they stand to gain with Blu-Ray Sony used the PS3 to force their Blu-Ray platform on to the market, from the get-go they didn't care about how much money they lost on the machine. Now that Blu-Ray is the next generation standard they'll start to look at reducing the cost of the machine to get it in to more people's homes. Once they have done that it'll catch on pretty quickly as a multimedia device.

 

A rather shocking fact, but in some areas of the market the PS3 is the ultimate casual gamer's console. Take a look over at AVForums, so many nice set-ups and so many of them have a PS3 for "Blu-Ray and the occasional video game". Over the next couple of years i expect this is the route Sony will take, they'll push it as a Blu-Ray player AND a games machine, with neither aspect being more important.

 

When (or if) Microsoft release a new console it will be more powerful still and make the 360 and PS3 redundant as the place for cutting edge (graphically speaking) games.

 

Microsoft won't launch a new platform for ages, it makes no sense to. Neither of their competitors can afford to advance their hardware far past the current 360/PS3 mark. Such hardware would be too expensive for Nintendo, and would alienate them again (this time for being too powerful, they'd get a lot of upscaled PS3/360 games). Sony won't be looking for another platform until they know if they can turn the PS3 in to a success or not, it's far too early to admit defeat.

 

hardware scaler

 

Just to make this quick point. An 'Upscaling Wii' seems to get mentioned a lot, but i wonder if anyone actually realises how useless one would be? HDTVs already have a built in upscaler. You'll find that the benefits of upscalers in £500 AV Recievers is highly debatable, so the sort of chip you'd find in a £180 games console is gonna be next to useless in a half decent TV set.

 

Having said that though, people do swear that they can see a difference when using 'upscaling' DVD players, so maybe there is some truth in the myth. Personally i'd put it down to the benefit of digital cabling rather than the effects of a cheap scaler. Maybe a Wii with a DVI port would be worth a try (HDMI is HD-Only, you can put anything through DVI).

[Zechs Merquise]

Losses of over $1.25 billion on the PS3, but just think how much money they stand to gain with Blu-Ray Sony used the PS3 to force their Blu-Ray platform on to the market, from the get-go they didn't care about how much money they lost on the machine. Now that Blu-Ray is the next generation standard they'll start to look at reducing the cost of the machine to get it in to more people's homes. Once they have done that it'll catch on pretty quickly as a multimedia device.

 

A rather shocking fact, but in some areas of the market the PS3 is the ultimate casual gamer's console. Take a look over at AVForums, so many nice set-ups and so many of them have a PS3 for "Blu-Ray and the occasional video game". Over the next couple of years i expect this is the route Sony will take, they'll push it as a Blu-Ray player AND a games machine, with neither aspect being more important.

 

I think it'll be quite a few Blu-ray disks to overturn those loses! Also, it's going to take a long time before Blu-ray really starts turning the profits as it doesn't have mass market penetration yet. The vast majority of 'normal' people still don't have a clue what Blu-ray is.

 

I also think to claim to claim that some areas of the market the PS3 is the casual system is stretching the truth a little - basically what you mean is some people brought a PS3 for a Blu-ray player.

 

Microsoft won't launch a new platform for ages, it makes no sense to. Neither of their competitors can afford to advance their hardware far past the current 360/PS3 mark. Such hardware would be too expensive for Nintendo, and would alienate them again (this time for being too powerful, they'd get a lot of upscaled PS3/360 games). Sony won't be looking for another platform until they know if they can turn the PS3 in to a success or not, it's far too early to admit defeat.

 

Well, I believe all the R&D departments will already be looking at new platforms, it's like any industry - by the time the next product is being boxed and shipped a new one is already on the drawing board.

 

I do believe that we won't hear anything concrete on them until late 2010. I've been playing games for the last 20 years, and in that time I've seen since service on 5 consoles - the NES, SNES, N64, GC and Wii! So what I will say is that's five generations of games in 20 years. People talking about a console having an affective lifespan of 10 years is stretching it, but those acting like the PS3 is going to last 15 years or talking utter nonsense.

 

As I did say earlier though - consoles can extend their lifespans through having superior technology or a larger user base, but neither of those things apply to the PS3.

 

I also doubt that the PS3 will overtake XBOX 360 or Wii simply because once a system starts doing well it's very hard to to turn that around and vice versa, simply because it's a case of momentum.

[Hellfire]

Not forgetting that Sony payed Warner $500 million to win the format war. We'll see how it goes, but it does give them more of a fighting chance finacially wise, since blu ray was accepted. It also depends on how the price of stand alone Blue Ray players drops and considering it's usually fast and PS3 will either not drop or drop making Sony losing even more money... won't be easy. They do have all the reasons to release their next console later than usual. As should MS.

[Maiky-NiSuTe]

nintendo will go HD no doubt about that. when? who knows but eventually they will

[Emasher]

Having said that though, people do swear that they can see a difference when using 'upscaling' DVD players, so maybe there is some truth in the myth. Personally i'd put it down to the benefit of digital cabling rather than the effects of a cheap scaler. Maybe a Wii with a DVI port would be worth a try (HDMI is HD-Only, you can put anything through DVI).

 

Really? I was under the impression that DVI and HDMI were exactly the same for video?