khilafah Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 When I was at work this evening, I was thinking about how strange it was that I was starting to look forward to the New 3DS quite a lot.. and then it got me wondering if it would be a good idea for the Wii U to get similar treatment With calls previously for Nintendo to basically relaunch the system, would a New Wii U and New Wii U XL be such a bad idea..? The New Wii U XL could be the console and Gamepad similar to what we currently have whilst the standard, non-XL version would have a considerably smaller version of the Gamepad, perhaps with a screen more similar in size to something like the original 3DS. For those that see off-TV play as important, the XL version may be the best option while others may prefer the more compact version for other reasons.. especially if it incorporated the SNES style A, B, X, Y buttons of the New 3DS Relaunch is only worth doing without the gamepad at a reduced price.
Stewie Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 I'm really glad they announced this before smash bros comes out! Now I can spare the money I was going to spend on the limited edition XL and stick around with my normal 3DS a little longer. I really like the new smaller one, the swap plates are super fun, and I like the second stick! ALSO YES A MATTE FINISH. I missed out on xenoblade chronicles for the wii, because I refused to buy another wii controller haha. I'm looking forward to play it on my new 3ds! It's good they beefed it up a bit, loading the OS and miiverse can take quite a while! I think it will be way less frustrating when it all goes a bit more smooth! The thing is though, I loved my dsi, but after 2 years, the 3DS was already announced. It felt way too early for a succesor back then. I hope it doesn't end up like this again. PS: I wonder if this will use the regular Dsi/3DS/3DS xl charger? I hope so! I do believe they said it would work with the 3DS charger.
Sheikah Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 You know what, I'm actually really looking forward to those basic quality-of-life improvements that the New3DS will bring, moreso than any graphics upgrade. (obviously ignoring the fact that it's now powerful enough to handle 3D Xenoblade of course! I rarely post on Miiverse on 3DS because it's just so sluggish, while on Wii U I post like all the time (it's actually a bit of a curse when I'm playing through a classic VC game again, because I can't help myself from stopping every 5 mins to post yet another funny caption about something stupid I noticed ) I can very easily see myself doing that much more often on the New3DS now that they've fixed that whole issue Even if you found more use for Miiverse, the improvements to its loading (if that even will happen - it's not like we know that'll be improved significantly yet) would still be less impressive than upping the really poor DPI of the XL. And I'm saying this only because it's so bad - if it were ok, I'd be inclined to agree with you. But as it stands, 2D mode on the XL is 95 DPI. To put that into perspective, the original iPhone launched in 2007 and was 163 PPI. So the blocky pixel screen on the XL is basically pre-'1st gen' smartphone era, something you might be used to looking at around 10 years ago. It's very jarring if you're used to playing with other devices, and I don't doubt people would have seen this as a MASSIVE reason to upgrade. That's why I don't think they've addressed the most important issues with this model (also, increasing download speeds seems odd to gun for given their account system and seemingly little benefit for buying games online vs physical copies from online retailers).
Wii Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 Even if you found more use for Miiverse, the improvements to its loading (if that even will happen - it's not like we know that'll be improved significantly yet) would still be less impressive than upping the really poor DPI of the XL. And I'm saying this only because it's so bad - if it were ok, I'd be inclined to agree with you. But as it stands, 2D mode on the XL is 95 DPI. To put that into perspective, the original iPhone launched in 2007 and was 163 PPI. So the blocky pixel screen on the XL is basically pre-'1st gen' smartphone era, something you might be used to looking at around 10 years ago. It's very jarring if you're used to playing with other devices, and I don't doubt people would have seen this as a MASSIVE reason to upgrade. That's why I don't think they've addressed the most important issues with this model (also, increasing download speeds seems odd to gun for given their account system and seemingly little benefit for buying games online vs physical copies from online retailers). How much was the original iPhone?
Sheikah Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 (edited) How much was the original iPhone? Don't know, but I bet they could make it for peanuts today. You see what I'm saying? Not sure how it could be too profit draining to sell something that is just on par with a 7 year old device in one aspect. They're already upping the processor power and they could do so to accommodate a resolution bump (which still wouldn't be difficult, as we're not talking 720p resolutions here). Edited August 31, 2014 by Sheikah
Wii Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 I did answer the question. I'm not letting this go. Show me where you answered the question? In fact I challenge anybody to show me where he answered the question? You said you did but didn't, that would make you a .... Can't believe others are defending this BS. To come back and say others are doing it too is no defence. That's like saying Saddam was a bad man but sure wasn't Hitler worse?
S.C.G Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 I must admit, seeing as they have gone to the trouble of improving the architecture then improving the screen seems like a no-brainer but in any case I'll just settle for having a brand new unit with no dead pixels and no scratch on the screen from day one owing to tiny pieces of stray plastic being attached to the outer rim of the lower screen!
Guy Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 If the bottom screen scratches the top screen on this new model, even Serebii will have to admit there's an issue.
Wii Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 If the bottom screen scratches the top screen on this new model, even Serebii will have to admit there's an issue. You'd think but he won't.
Serebii Posted August 31, 2014 Author Posted August 31, 2014 If the bottom screen scratches the top screen on this new model, even Serebii will have to admit there's an issue. I'm assuming they'll have it fixed Hell, most XLs don't do it
Guy Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 Hell, most XLs don't do it Mine sure does. I have wondered how widespread the issue is though. Anyone else here have vertical scratches on the edges on the top screen of their XL?
Dcubed Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 (edited) Even if you found more use for Miiverse, the improvements to its loading (if that even will happen - it's not like we know that'll be improved significantly yet) would still be less impressive than upping the really poor DPI of the XL. And I'm saying this only because it's so bad - if it were ok, I'd be inclined to agree with you. But as it stands, 2D mode on the XL is 95 DPI. To put that into perspective, the original iPhone launched in 2007 and was 163 PPI. So the blocky pixel screen on the XL is basically pre-'1st gen' smartphone era, something you might be used to looking at around 10 years ago. It's very jarring if you're used to playing with other devices, and I don't doubt people would have seen this as a MASSIVE reason to upgrade. That's why I don't think they've addressed the most important issues with this model (also, increasing download speeds seems odd to gun for given their account system and seemingly little benefit for buying games online vs physical copies from online retailers). They've already stated that Miiverse will load faster (and have demoed it as one of the key new features of the New3DS), so I see no reason to doubt it. Also you know full well that they can't improve the DPI without upping the resolution; and they wouldn't up it by anything less than a clean x2 in order to not damage the image quality of existing 3DS games (which they can't do because the hardware isn't orders of magnitude better, because it is a revision and not a successor - but we've gone over this before several times so eh :p ) Edited August 31, 2014 by Dcubed
Sheikah Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 (edited) Also you know full well that they can't improve the DPI without upping the resolution (which they can't do because the hardware isn't orders of magnitude better, because it is a revision and not a successor - but we've gone over this before several times so eh :p ) But they are revising the hardware, and have fractured their audience themselves (New 3DS 'only' games). Seems silly to take that plunge and not provide a decent upgrade to the poor DPI of the XL, which is what the system really needs. In saying 'several orders of magnitude better' you're making it sound like it would be too difficult or expensive to do to support the increased resolution. It most definitely wouldn't be. There are android tablets that are £100 with a better screen DPI and graphical capabilities than this. You're also ignoring the possibility where they could allow you to disable 3D to make use of a higher resolution, since some of the power and lines go to producing the 3D effect. I'm not advocating that they improve it too much so that this could basically be their next console. Rather, that they improve it enough to support future 3DS games at a higher resolution. Edited August 31, 2014 by Sheikah
Serebii Posted August 31, 2014 Author Posted August 31, 2014 But they are revising the hardware, and have fractured their audience themselves (New 3DS 'only' games). Seems silly to take that plunge and not provide a decent upgrade to the poor DPI of the XL, which is what the system really needs. In saying 'several orders of magnitude better' you're making it sound like it would be too difficult or expensive to do to support the increased resolution. It most definitely wouldn't be. There are android tablets that are £100 with a better screen DPI and graphical capabilities than this. You're also ignoring the possibility where they could allow you to disable 3D to make use of a higher resolution, since some of the power and lines go to producing the 3D effect. I'm not advocating that they improve it too much so that this could basically be their next console. Rather, that they improve it enough to support future 3DS games at a higher resolution. Doing so would require more spec upgrades than the n3DS is receiving. It would also require more to the developers of n3DS exclusive/enhanced games. You're asking for the n3DS to be a new console altogether, and that's not what a hardware revision does. You need to accept that the n3DS is just a 3DS. Seriously.
Sheikah Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 (edited) Doing so would require more spec upgrades than the n3DS is receiving. Obviously? Wasn't it clear that I was saying they have missed an opportunity? In saying that, don't go wrongly thinking 'it'd be unaffordable'. As shown by android tablets that sell for £100, it's certainly affordable to just up the specs enough to support a slightly higher resolution. Not a resolution anywhere near 720p, mind. You're asking for the n3DS to be a new console altogether, and that's not what a hardware revision does. That's not what I'm proposing at all. A model which can run the same games at a higher resolution setting does not mean the games suddenly look next generation, or that it wouldn't run the same games the other systems run. It just means that the games wouldn't look so blocky on the XL. Edited August 31, 2014 by Sheikah
Serebii Posted August 31, 2014 Author Posted August 31, 2014 Obviously? Wasn't it clear that I was saying they have missed an opportunity? In saying that, don't go wrongly thinking 'it'd be unaffordable'. As shown by android tablets that sell for £100, it's certainly affordable to just up the specs enough to support a slightly higher resolution. Not a resolution anywhere near 720p, mind. That's not what I'm proposing at all. A model which can run the same games at a higher resolution setting does not mean the games suddenly look next generation, or that it wouldn't run the same games the other systems run. It just means that the games wouldn't look so blocky on the XL. It would require more processing power to the point that it would be equivalent to a successor. That's the thing.
Goron_3 Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 I have to admit that I'm surprised that they are delaying the new revision until next year here in Europe, given how close it will launch to E3 where Nintendo will likely show off their next handheld console. I'm in, for now
Serebii Posted August 31, 2014 Author Posted August 31, 2014 I have to admit that I'm surprised that they are delaying the new revision until next year here in Europe, given how close it will launch to E3 where Nintendo will likely show off their next handheld console. I'm in, for now I think the successor is further out than you think
Sheikah Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 It would require more processing power to the point that it would be equivalent to a successor. That's the thing. What? Who made you the authority on "How much extra processor power constitutes a successor"? I actually have no idea what you are talking about. Nintendo have made a new revision that plays games that the other previous systems can't. That itself would make it more a 'successor' than a revision compared to the model that I am instead proposing.
Serebii Posted August 31, 2014 Author Posted August 31, 2014 What? Who made you the authority on "How much extra processor power constitutes a successor"? I actually have no idea what you are talking about. Nintendo have made a new revision that plays games that the other previous systems can't. That itself would make it more a 'successor' than a revision compared to the model that I am instead proposing. Just like the DSi and the GameBoyColor were successors, right?
Wii Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 @Serebii How's that answer coming along? Yeah, I thought so!
Goron_3 Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 I think the successor is further out than you think The GBA Micro was announced on the same day as the DS and the DSi XL was released just months before the 3DS reveal. In both cases the 'outgoing' console was selling decent amounts. With the 3DS, sales aren't as strong as Nintendo would hope and a lot of that is simply down to the dated brand. This revision will serve the same purpose as the DSi XL; it's gives the console momentum so when a new console comes out, they can bank on this one to keep selling. This worked really well with the GBA-> DS, because the DS, like most consoles, didn't hit it's stride until year 2, so it gave them a buffer. It's also worth noting that the 3DS's best year was the fiscal year 2012-2013; it doesn't make sense for them to keep the 3DS out for too long without a successor. Imagine if the successor didn't come out until 2015..it wouldn't hit it's stride until 2016-2017..could Nintendo rely on the new 3DS to do great numbers until then, up to 4 after its strongest year? A final point as well is that they'll want to release the next home console and handheld apart so they can ensure that both have enough exclusive software available. They'll want to avoid all the problems that plagued them with 3DS and Wii U development.
Serebii Posted August 31, 2014 Author Posted August 31, 2014 The GBA Micro was announced on the same day as the DS and the DSi XL was released just months before the 3DS reveal. In both cases the 'outgoing' console was selling decent amounts. With the 3DS, sales aren't as strong as Nintendo would hope and a lot of that is simply down to the dated brand. This revision will serve the same purpose as the DSi XL; it's gives the console momentum so when a new console comes out, they can bank on this one to keep selling. This worked really well with the GBA-> DS, because the DS, like most consoles, didn't hit it's stride until year 2, so it gave them a buffer. It's also worth noting that the 3DS's best year was the fiscal year 2012-2013; it doesn't make sense for them to keep the 3DS out for too long without a successor. Imagine if the successor didn't come out until 2015..it wouldn't hit it's stride until 2016-2017..could Nintendo rely on the new 3DS to do great numbers until then, up to 4 after its strongest year? A final point as well is that they'll want to release the next home console and handheld apart so they can ensure that both have enough exclusive software available. They'll want to avoid all the problems that plagued them with 3DS and Wii U development. We'll see. My money is on an E3 2016 reveal with a release November 2016. I personally view this as the same purpose as the DSi, not the DSi XL. The 3DS is less than four years old. It's way too soon.
Ashley Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 @Serebii How's that answer coming along? Yeah, I thought so! This is getting old and as nobody but yourself seems to be asking for it, please move this to PMs.
Recommended Posts