Serebii Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 That's true. At the very least, Wii U BC is seemingly assured with the next console (and it also means that there's a possibility that a future handheld might even be able to play GCN/Wii/Wii U games natively depending on what kind of hardware configuration they go with!) DS/GBA/NES/SNES/N64 VC compatibility will also already be there from the outset too! (What a beastly lineup that would be. They could potentially have a device that is compatible with almost every single Nintendo console ever made right from the outset! ) There's a selling point right there. Biggest launch line-up in history. ... ... ... It won't happen
Retro_Link Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 That's true. At the very least, Wii U BC is seemingly assured with the next console (and it also means that there's a possibility that a future handheld might even be able to play GCN/Wii/Wii U games natively depending on what kind of hardware configuration they go with!) DS/GBA/NES/SNES/N64 VC compatibility will also already be there from the outset too! (What a beastly lineup that would be. They could potentially have a device that is compatible with almost every single Nintendo console ever made right from the outset! ) How is that ever going to happen from Nintendo? :p You can't even get Mario 64 on the virtual console, and have to re-purchase each game across separate systems. Wishful thinking though
Serebii Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 How is that ever going to happen from Nintendo? :p You can't even get Mario 64 on the virtual console, and have to re-purchase each game across separate systems. Wishful thinking though This whole concept they have put forward is to aim to correct that so it doesn't happen again.
Retro_Link Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 This whole concept they have put forward is to aim to correct that so it doesn't happen again.Once again it just seems to be a concept coming a whole generation behind. It's good to offer parity and catch up of course, but by the time they do it won't be a USP (well... ok it will be in terms of Nintendo only games, but not in terms of backwards compatibility).
Serebii Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Once again it just seems to be a concept coming a whole generation behind. It's good to offer parity and catch up of course, but by the time they do it won't be a USP (well... ok it will be in terms of Nintendo only games, but not in terms of backwards compatibility). How does that matter? It doesn't matter that it may be a generation late. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't do it.
Dcubed Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) How is that ever going to happen from Nintendo? :p You can't even get Mario 64 on the virtual console, and have to re-purchase each game across separate systems. Wishful thinking though Technically speaking, you can through the Wii U's "Wii Menu". The reason why Wii games require a seperate "Wii Menu" is because the original Wii hardware had no underlying OS/hypervisor that could manage security and other hardware functions in the background and the hardware was hardcoded to run downloaded games off of the built-in flash memory only (which is why the Wii's "SD Card Menu" worked by copying game files back and forth whenever you went to run a game off of that menu). Because of the lack of an OS that could abstract these functions, there's no way to force Wii games to run off of alternative storage without blowing the Wii U's security wide open (and even then there are lots of dodgy software compatibility issues with such an approach that Nintendo would want to avoid - looking at homebrew solutions in use on Wii, many VC and Wiiware games actually flat out do not work via USB or SD Card at all!) The Wii U and 3DS however do feature an underlying OS that abstracts these hardware functions and the games support every form of storage that you would need; meaning that Nintendo could just put their games on the storefronts of their future consoles unaltered and they would just work like their next generation games would do. No silly "Wii U Menu" or "3DS Menu" required - just like how BC works on Windows PC or iOS Edited February 3, 2014 by Dcubed
Retro_Link Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 That doesn't mean that they shouldn't do it.Which is what I said. Do it and catch up, but don't expect it to be something that drives sales by that point.
Serebii Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Which is what I said. Do it and catch up, but don't expect it to be something that drives sales by that point. They never presented it as a sale point, though.
Retro_Link Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 They never presented it as a sale point, though.No you did, I was replying to you.
Cube Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 I think Nintendo's biggest problem with the Virtual Console is their need for perfection, that they have to include a slightly different emulator tailored to every single game. Nobody complains about the PS1 emulators on the PS3 or Vita, and those work via a singular emulator that's part of the OS (well, people in NA complain as for some unknown reason, Crash and Spyro aren't available on the Vita over there). They need to tone down on the testing and tinkering so they can steam through them all at a good rate. Edit: Although they really need to have options to disable the backlights on the GamePad and lower 3DS screen.
Retro_Link Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) That's what I said before on here, but others said no one would except Nintendo games that were anything less than perfection and they'd rather it didn't happen than have to play a game anything less than perfect! FFS at this point I'd rather play N64 games through some crappy internet emulator than play no N64 games whatsoever. People are being far too picky! Edited February 3, 2014 by Retro_Link
Dcubed Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) I think Nintendo's biggest problem with the Virtual Console is their need for perfection, that they have to include a slightly different emulator tailored to every single game. Nobody complains about the PS1 emulators on the PS3 or Vita, and those work via a singular emulator that's part of the OS (well, people in NA complain as for some unknown reason, Crash and Spyro aren't available on the Vita over there). They need to tone down on the testing and tinkering so they can steam through them all at a good rate. Edit: Although they really need to have options to disable the backlights on the GamePad and lower 3DS screen. I've said this before, but I don't think that the reason for their slow VC software schedule comes down to technical reasons. If you look at their lineup of VC games in Japan, there are tons of games that are already available there that aren't available elsewhere (including games like Super Mario Kart, Secret of Mana, Final Fantasy 6, Ogre Battle MOTBQ and loads more!). What is much more likely is that they're having trouble securing licenses for the re-release of 3rd party titles and as such, they don't want to run out of their own 1st party games completely, so they slow down the release of those too (but even then, they've been quick about getting their own NES & SNES games re-released on Wii U - they've released them much faster than they ever did on Wii). The conversion process from Wii-Wii U is relatively simple since the Wii VC games already run natively anyway. They already have the base emulators done, all they need to do is add the extra features like the new manuals, save states, button mapping etc and modify them slightly to support the new hardware functions/storage offered by Wii U). The fact that they already have re-rereleased almost all of the problem games from NES & SNES that were released on the original Wii VC like Pilotwings (DSP1-A chip) Super Mario Kart (DSP1-B chip), Kirby Super Star (SA1 Chip) and Mega Man X2 (the infamous CX4 chip - notorious for being one of the most difficult of all SNES enhancement chips to emulate properly) is proof enough that converting from Wii VC to Wii U VC is a relatively trivial process (and it's also why they can afford to offer the upgrade discount, since there isn't as much R&D and QA work that needs to go into these upgraded releases). Those games that I listed didn't get released on the Wii VC until well into the console's life, while on Wii U they happened to be amongst the first games that were re-rereleased. That's because they had already overcome the major technological challenges involved in getting them up and running in their emulators. GBA and DS are are different matter though since they'll be starting from scratch with these ones (and they'll also probably be chucking out their old N64 emulator code and starting from scratch there too as the Wii/GCN N64 emulator lacked a lot of features and didn't emulate any N64 game that used custom microcode - like Rare's games or many 3rd party ones like Turok 1-3 or Rogue Squadron). Edited February 3, 2014 by Dcubed
Serebii Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 No you did, I was replying to you. I was referring to having a huge Virtual Console at launch, not unified systems :p
Retro_Link Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 I was referring to having a huge Virtual Console at launch, not unified systems :pI was talking about both points. The demand is there for the VC now. From my perspective at least the longer this wait for everything from Nintendo goes on the less inclined I am to stick by them. Like I said I'm starting to feel I might aswell just start buying the games I want off ebay, than wait 2-3 years for it to potentially happen. The next console always seems to be their answer for everything. We'll see.
dazzybee Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Explains why they're putting DS on Wii U i guess, further proofing the new hardware which will be based on the wii u, easy to transfer.. It sounds like they're putting things in place for the future, it SHOULDN'T have taken this long, it SHOULD all be sorted by now, but what good is there in saying this and dwelling on it, let's relish on the positivity that they seem to be making strides. As for this R&D thing into something new, surely it's just app development and nothing more exciting than that!! I fear a nintendo channel app with all the "amazing" videos on the nintendo video. I still don't understand how this app brings awareness though, why would anyone download it if they don't already have a ads or wii u?!! Small games and experiences will bring people to them, and after that may be interested in more... I guess we have to wait and see what they do. but it wouldn't surprise me if it was yet another huge fuck up/missed opportunity
Goron_3 Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 The most important thing Iwata said is definitely this imo: On the other hand, software publishers are not necessarily keen on making games in genres that have weaker affinity with audiences that Nintendo has not been as strong with, where making a huge investment does not guarantee a sufficient return. Acknowledging why they aren't getting most of the big 3rd party titles is a good start but I wonder if this is actually going to stimulate a response. They need more western support and giving Donkey Kong to their only western developer wasn't a smart idea. It feels quite good knowing that for the last 6 months I've been saying that they need to diversify their output to interest western gamers and now he's gone and said it. You've got a console that's got a great reputation of platformers, now just diversify that line up!
liger05 Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 The most important thing Iwata said is definitely this imo: On the other hand, software publishers are not necessarily keen on making games in genres that have weaker affinity with audiences that Nintendo has not been as strong with, where making a huge investment does not guarantee a sufficient return. Acknowledging why they aren't getting most of the big 3rd party titles is a good start but I wonder if this is actually going to stimulate a response. They need more western support and giving Donkey Kong to their only western developer wasn't a smart idea. It feels quite good knowing that for the last 6 months I've been saying that they need to diversify their output to interest western gamers and now he's gone and said it. You've got a console that's got a great reputation of platformers, now just diversify that line up! There is only one party here which can change the way third parties look at nintendo hardware and thats Nintendo. What is worrying is Iwata says the above but then on the other hand he says With regard to Wii U, we first need to create a strong foundation in areas Nintendo excels at and achieve a sufficient sales volume. If we manage to do so, those publishers in the overseas markets who are currently not interested in Wii U will be attracted to the Wii U platform, as they were to Nintendo 3DS. This is going to be our approach in the near future. I dont think is how Nintendo get third parties onboard. While stronger hardware sales could see third party shovelware like we saw on the wii it isnt going to get those games which appeal to core gamers.
Ashley Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Haven't they claimed that the "we'll build a strong base and they'll come to us" is their approach on numerous occasions before and it's failed on numerous occasions before?
liger05 Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Haven't they claimed that the "we'll build a strong base and they'll come to us" is their approach on numerous occasions before and it's failed on numerous occasions before? Yes. Not exactly a plan.
Sheikah Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 The thought process there is flawed. They think if they have a good first party lineup then 3rd party developers will come in... Even if the Wii U got a decent install base and attracted third party games, if the 3rd party devs make the same multi format games to release on both Wii U and PS4/X1 then most people will buy the next gen versions. The PS4/X1 versions will almost certainly look and run better, with potentially better online features (if applicable), so it's more likely people will just buy those. The only way it would work is if devs said 'because the Wii U has a decent install base now, we will make this game exclusive for Wii U'. Which is unlikely to happen, given how much money they would lose releasing only on Wii U.
Grazza Posted February 5, 2014 Posted February 5, 2014 Now this part is reeeaaallllyyy interesting. It seems that, contrary to what I would've expected (and I imagine what most people would've expected) it seems that Nintendo's next systems (the ones that share the same hardware architecture) will actually be based on the Wii U's hardware architecture and NOT the 3DS! So it seems that they're not looking to use ARM for their next handheld and console but rather it might actually be Power PC based again! And while it wont be using the Wii U architecture wholesale, it sounds like it should be backwards compatible with Wii U (and by extension Wii and GCN as well). This means that they wont have to throw away all of their technology and knowhow and that they should have a fairly smooth transition from Wii U to whatever new machines that they make (not too unlike them going from GCN-Wii). It also means that all of their experience in developing Wii U software will not go to waste, so even if the hardware fails to recover; sticking with the Wii U will give their development teams a strong headstart with the next consoles that come after the Wii U and 3DS. Yes, this is fascinating, in my opinion, and the main reason I'm confident about Nintendo's future. If I'm reading it correctly, Nintendo is aiming for one "platform" or "system", with various form factors. I've always thought it was crazy that Nintendo can have one successful console, then a flop straight after it. Popular one minute, then ignored the next. I'm not necessarily talking about specific consoles, but the idea in general. Apple doesn't have this, nor does Android. You don't hear people saying Samsung's Galaxy Tab 2 is a big success compared to the Galaxy 3, for example. Obviously some models sell better than others, but the point is that it's judged as a continuous platform/system. If I've understood this properly, the next system could simply be the "Nintendo". You'd download the latest Zelda and, if you had Nintendo's budget handheld/tablet, it might play in 480p; if you had their deluxe console, it might play in 1080p. Maybe there would be something in between that'd play it in 720p. We know everything from now on will be based on the Wii U architecture, so I don't think we'll ever see a traditional, "weak" handheld again (that's not meant as an insult; just a comment on how technology has moved on). This would be combined with an accounts system, which would mean that you could access all your software (including Virtual Console) whether you were using your console, handheld or something else (Super Metroid would still be in 50Hz though ). Maybe I'm getting carried away, but I honestly do see one system from now on. If they do this, and launch several models at once, they would either have to leave a successor to the 3DS later than usual, or introduce a successor to the Wii U earlier than usual (I'm hoping for the latter). Perhaps we'll see this new range introduced in 2016 or something? The only thing is, they're going to have to decide whether their future is dual screen or single screen.
Serebii Posted February 5, 2014 Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) Yes, this is fascinating, in my opinion, and the main reason I'm confident about Nintendo's future. If I'm reading it correctly, Nintendo is aiming for one "platform" or "system", with various form factors. I've always thought it was crazy that Nintendo can have one successful console, then a flop straight after it. Popular one minute, then ignored the next. I'm not necessarily talking about specific consoles, but the idea in general. Apple doesn't have this, nor does Android. You don't hear people saying Samsung's Galaxy Tab 2 is a big success compared to the Galaxy 3, for example. Obviously some models sell better than others, but the point is that it's judged as a continuous platform/system. If I've understood this properly, the next system could simply be the "Nintendo". You'd download the latest Zelda and, if you had Nintendo's budget handheld/tablet, it might play in 480p; if you had their deluxe console, it might play in 1080p. Maybe there would be something in between that'd play it in 720p. We know everything from now on will be based on the Wii U architecture, so I don't think we'll ever see a traditional, "weak" handheld again (that's not meant as an insult; just a comment on how technology has moved on). This would be combined with an accounts system, which would mean that you could access all your software (including Virtual Console) whether you were using your console, handheld or something else (Super Metroid would still be in 50Hz though ). Maybe I'm getting carried away, but I honestly do see one system from now on. If they do this, and launch several models at once, they would either have to leave a successor to the 3DS later than usual, or introduce a successor to the Wii U earlier than usual (I'm hoping for the latter). Perhaps we'll see this new range introduced in 2016 or something? The only thing is, they're going to have to decide whether their future is dual screen or single screen. It's not that the consoles would be the same, just built on the same architecture and running the same OS. They will still be different consoles, not one, and they will still have exclusive games on both. The idea of this is for ease for the developers and for a uniformity in user accounts. Games will not be released on both unless the developer chooses to. This just means that games can share assets, engines etc. between both with very little issues. Think of it like iOS. iPhone and iPad are two different devices with different specs but run the same OS and have the same architecture. There's software exclusive to the iPhone, there's software exclusive to the iPad and there's software that's scaled so it can be on both. You are right though in that this makes it massively more likely for us to have a uniform Virtual Console across both devices. Edited February 5, 2014 by Serebii
dazzybee Posted February 5, 2014 Posted February 5, 2014 There's no software exclusive to the iPhone. All iPhone apps work on the iPad.
Grazza Posted February 5, 2014 Posted February 5, 2014 It's not that the consoles would be the same, just built on the same architecture and running the same OS. They will still be different consoles, not one, and they will still have exclusive games on both. I appreciate what you're saying, but why would the weaker device (the handheld, for instance) have exclusives? If the machines use the same architecture, every game could be scaled up very easily. Think of it like iOS. iPhone and iPad are two different devices with different specs but run the same OS and have the same architecture. There's software exclusive to the iPhone, there's software exclusive to the iPad and there's software that's scaled so it can be on both. To be honest, I haven't used iOS personally, but I assume there are different tiers and standards (I must admit, I'm surprised there is software that works on iPhone, but not iPad)? In theory, Nintendo could introduce a new standard more frequently than it currently releases new consoles. For example, a new Zelda that doesn't work on the very weakest platform, is OK on the intermediate device and is best of all on the deluxe console.
Recommended Posts