• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

A Serious Question Regarding the NX

CrimsonCavalier

Fuzzy Pickles
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Location
United States
Gender
XY
A lot of people are eagerly awaiting the NX. However, many of us feel like Nintendo is taking a huge risk and it is one that may not pay off. As a long-time Nintendo fan, in fact, I'm actually very concerned this may be the one from which Nintendo does not recover. I hope that is not the case, but I can't help but think that Nintendo is making a mistake here, and they may not survive it.

On the other hand, I think there has to be a scenario in which the NX is a success. Where I am proven wrong, the NX is a wild success, Zelda is the game of the decade, and everyone is happy.

But what is it going to actually take for that to happen? The discussion is just that: what will it take for the NX to be a success. Mind you, don't mistake this for the NX to be a success for you, but in general. For the general public, for the industry, and commercially?
 
Joined
Dec 16, 2014
Location
Milwaukee WI
Gender
half centaur
I hate that I will probably buy it despite feeling a bit burned from Nintendo. The Wii U had a few games that were really great, but over all it was pretty lack luster and didn't do well (vita outsells it). What bugs me the most about Nintendo is all the stuff I purchased for my 3DS only to completely lose it having to sell my 3DS. I hate that despite having a Nintendo ID attached to it you cannot redownload your purchased goods (without going through crazy hoops). That and I don't like gimmicks being so forced. While sometimes Nintendos gimmicks are fun and rewarding, they can also be too forced like most people are saying with Star Fox. I'd rather have less innovation and more focus on just good game play, so we'll see how gimmicky NX is.
 

Emma

Eye See You
Site Staff
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Location
Vegas
Gender
Female
For me, the writing is on the wall. Nintendo is pulling the exact same stunts that Sega did in the late 90s. It backfired very, very badly on Sega and they were never able to recover from it. They're a shadow of their former selves. I hope the NX succeeds, but I very, very highly doubt it. They got themselves into this situation by choosing to repackage the GameCube into the Wii and selling the exact same system again. YES, they managed to move a lot of units there. And sold it beyond anyone's expectations, but they condemned themselves down this path when they did so. They made themselves cripplingly reliant on a casual market which at the time, was already obviously going to start moving onto the mobile market which was rapidly expanding. That market is what made the Wii so profitable and it's a market that is never going to be a noteworthy target audience for any console ever again. By choosing to make an underpowered system with difficult to use controls (as in, difficult to program for), they alienated a lot of third party developers who are very unlikely to ever trust them or work with them again. This is why I don't consider the Wii to be a success. While it had impressive short-term gains, it absolutely shredded the company's future prospects. And that's what we're seeing now. The legacy of the Wii combined with horrifyingly bad marketing led the Wii U to be a failure.

It's not an ideal solution, but the best way out of this Nintendo has that has the least amount of risk, though it's still very risky. And that is to just brand this system as an upgraded Wii U and not a next gen console. There's still a lot of problems with doing this and it'll carry the inevitable division of the consumer base. But it'll have the least risk of ruining them over it because it'll encourage more third parties to consider porting to Nintendo systems if they can also use the existing Wii U consumer base which, while small, still is sizable enough to be worth considering.

But I'm not even entirely comfortable with that solution. It feels bad and leaves a bad taste in your mouth. That's exactly why they never should have gotten themselves into this situation because there's really no way out of it.
 
Nintendo need third party support with mature games like CoD and they need to change their own stripes

Make some new IPs that appeal to the majority of the gaming community. Mass effect, call of duty, far cry, fallout... Nintendo needs games like these of their own.

From what I know, younger generations don't want nintendo, neither do 40+ bracket.

I dont think Nintendo can do well in the west, they're always gonna be lagging behind unless they reverse their image.

If they don't it'll only be those of us on forums like this who buy their stuff.
 
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
I hate that I will probably buy it despite feeling a bit burned from Nintendo. The Wii U had a few games that were really great, but over all it was pretty lack luster and didn't do well (vita outsells it). What bugs me the most about Nintendo is all the stuff I purchased for my 3DS only to completely lose it having to sell my 3DS. I hate that despite having a Nintendo ID attached to it you cannot redownload your purchased goods (without going through crazy hoops). That and I don't like gimmicks being so forced. While sometimes Nintendos gimmicks are fun and rewarding, they can also be too forced like most people are saying with Star Fox. I'd rather have less innovation and more focus on just good game play, so we'll see how gimmicky NX is.
What are those crazy hoops you're talking about? I've deleted games from my SD card and redownloaded them later many times, never had a problem doing that. Or am I missing the point?
 
Joined
Dec 16, 2014
Location
Milwaukee WI
Gender
half centaur
What are those crazy hoops you're talking about? I've deleted games from my SD card and redownloaded them later many times, never had a problem doing that. Or am I missing the point?
That's because you bought the games and redownloaded them on the same hardware. Switch to a new system and you cannot redownload those games. Have to sell your 3DS because you're in a bind? You lost all your stuff. Want to switch to a 3DS XL from a normal 3DS without having both at the same time? You lost all your stuff. New XL from old XL, same thing.

Nintendo does not have account bound games, only hardware. Same goes for Wii U.
 

CrimsonCavalier

Fuzzy Pickles
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Location
United States
Gender
XY
@Spirit I think one of the most frustrating parts is that Nintendo has an IP for every genre of game you can imagine. Nintendo owns, fully or in part, shooters, racing games, RPGs, horror games, puzzlers, music/rhythm, action/adventure, etc.. There is not a genre that Nintendo couldn't make a game for with IPs they already own.

@Matt I think they need to distance themselves from the Wii name as much as possible. Hell, if they can, don't even use the letters W or I at all.

I definitely think there is a scenario where Nintendo gets it right now. And I think it starts with:

• A controller with no gimmicks, or at most, minimal gimmicks (i.e., the controller isn't the selling-point of the console)
• A unified online service (which is already coming, @DoomDash so that sort of thing that happened to you—and many others—does not happen again)
• Ease of portability, from the XBO and PS4 to NX
• A hard drive that is big enough for games, if digital downloads are going to be a thing for the NX
• The Virtual Console needs to come back with a bang; i.e., Wii Virtual Console level
 
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
That's because you bought the games and redownloaded them on the same hardware. Switch to a new system and you cannot redownload those games. Have to sell your 3DS because you're in a bind? You lost all your stuff. Want to switch to a 3DS XL from a normal 3DS without having both at the same time? You lost all your stuff. New XL from old XL, same thing.

Nintendo does not have account bound games, only hardware. Same goes for Wii U.
Oh, I see. That sucks indeed. :/
 

Emma

Eye See You
Site Staff
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Location
Vegas
Gender
Female
@Matt I think they need to distance themselves from the Wii name as much as possible. Hell, if they can, don't even use the letters W or I at all.
See, this is why I said I'm conflicted. Because this is a very good point too. Suggesting they make it an an upgraded Wii U wasn't an easy call. What tipped it over the edge is how if it is considered next gen, Sony and Microsoft will jump ahead and release "next gen" consoles within two years too like the did last time. Regardless of what Nintendo intended, or how much they even care, and regardless of whether or not it is a good idea. This will just bring us back to the same situation again where the Nintendo console is ignored yet again. And worse, it risks putting the entire industry into collapse like it did in 83. Since the economic situation is very bad right now, which why the last gen was so long. Those problems didn't just vanish. They're still there. And if we recklessly jump into a new gen before everyone is financially ready for it, it will put us a huge risk of collapse. And if that happens, many cherished gaming companies could go out of business permanently. Killing many valued IPs forever. It's just a stupid risk. I hope no matter what happens, Microsoft and Sony are not idiots and just stick with the current gen for now.

I definitely think there is a scenario where Nintendo gets it right now. And I think it starts with:

• A controller with no gimmicks, or at most, minimal gimmicks (i.e., the controller isn't the selling-point of the console)
• A unified online service (which is already coming, @DoomDash so that sort of thing that happened to you—and many others—does not happen again)
• Ease of portability, from the XBO and PS4 to NX
• A hard drive that is big enough for games, if digital downloads are going to be a thing for the NX
• The Virtual Console needs to come back with a bang; i.e., Wii Virtual Console level
Absolutely to all. But I would clarify that previous digital purchases need to be fully backwards compatible, no questions asked, no hoops to jump through, no extra purchase. That should help ease in existing Wii U users.
 

CrimsonCavalier

Fuzzy Pickles
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Location
United States
Gender
XY
And if we recklessly jump into a new gen before everyone is financially ready for it, it will put us a huge risk of collapse. And if that happens, many cherished gaming companies could go out of business permanently. Killing many valued IPs forever. It's just a stupid risk. I hope no matter what happens, Microsoft and Sony are not idiots and just stick with the current gen for now.
I agree completely to this. I think MS and Sony need to stay the course. If they jump the gun and rush into a new generation as a reaction to the NX, the only people who will suffer will be the consumer.

To be honest, Nintendo already opened up Pandora's Box and has made upgrading systems mid-cycle a standard. They did it with the DS —> DSi and they did it with the 3DS. Now Sony is doing it. The last thing we need is for Sony and MS to release a new console mid cycle. Of all the things Sony has blatantly ripped off from Nintendo, I hope this is the one time they don't.

If the XBO, PS4, and NX can coexist for the next 4-5 years, I think that is what will be best for the industry because that is what will be best for the gamer. There is no reason for anyone to start releasing new consoles when the good games for the current gen ones are just now starting to be released.
 

Emma

Eye See You
Site Staff
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Location
Vegas
Gender
Female
Well actually new consoles mid-gen have been done for a while. They always focus on the worst problems of the system. Last gen, both the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 got new versions mid-gen. These focused on their biggest problem, which in their case was severe overheating. That's what caused the Xbox 360's infamous red ring of death and it happened nearly as often on the PS3 too. Granted it was still pretty terrible in the new models, it was improved at least. Those problems were essentially eliminated this gen since they both have much more efficient cooling fans that are stronger, faster, and quieter; along with a much more efficient internal airflow.

Given that this isn't the problem this time, mid-gen models would address something else. And unfortunately it seems like the biggest issue is that they're underpowered. Which I think is because the PS4 and XB1 launched two years early because of them reacting to Nintendo launching four years early. Had they been patient and waited until Holiday 2015 like they originally said they would, they would have launched with better hardware.
 
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Location
Australia
A lot of people are eagerly awaiting the NX. However, many of us feel like Nintendo is taking a huge risk and it is one that may not pay off. As a long-time Nintendo fan, in fact, I'm actually very concerned this may be the one from which Nintendo does not recover. I hope that is not the case, but I can't help but think that Nintendo is making a mistake here, and they may not survive it.

On the other hand, I think there has to be a scenario in which the NX is a success. Where I am proven wrong, the NX is a wild success, Zelda is the game of the decade, and everyone is happy.

But what is it going to actually take for that to happen? The discussion is just that: what will it take for the NX to be a success. Mind you, don't mistake this for the NX to be a success for you, but in general. For the general public, for the industry, and commercially?
Look at Ocarina of Time. At that time the N64 was really doing poorly. At the time it was Nintendo's worst performing console in many aspects, a lot of that is still true till this very day. Nintendo's backs were to the wall. Nintendo needed something amasing to save the N64. Ocarina was that amazing something. That noe game singlehandedly saved the N64 as a console from not making profit. Nintendo often does its best work when its back is against the wall.

Nintendo is not in such a bad position now. Nintendo has the 3DS, it's making profit finally off the WiiU. Nintendo also had enough cash in the back to survuve roughly a decade of moderate loses. That ultimate doom and gloom scenario for Nintendo now is simply not there. The bigger picutre is what matters. The NX needs to be a solid platform that can take Ninrendo into the future. A flop on an NX will not hurt Nintendo much in the short term. But in the long term a flop of an NX will hurt them.

To me the NX being successful is the NX and it's add on sales making an overall profit. It took the WiiU a few years to do that. If the NX and add on sales can start generating a profit within it's first year, I'll call that a really good success. To do that Nintendo need to put out console selling games. And use those games as a huge advertisment of the must have feature of the NX. Things Nintendo simply did not do with the WiiU. If Nintendo can reach profit with the NX it'll allow them the buffer they need to prodice more innovative titles like the SFZ we have now.

If the XBO, PS4, and NX can coexist for the next 4-5 years, I think that is what will be best for the industry because that is what will be best for the gamer. There is no reason for anyone to start releasing new consoles when the good games for the current gen ones are just now starting to be released.
I hope you are aware that the best thing for the industry is for itself to be making more profits. Primarily they are all still businesses. Only a few radicals/revolutionaries like Iwata unstood that profits and what the gamers/customers really want to buy is totally intertwined. The heart of a gamer does influence their purchases. Iwata understood this more than anyone else ever in the gameing industry. That creates a conundrum though. Do you always appease the gamers or do you milk existing cash cows just for more profits? Nintendo seems to have a decent approach here. Milk the cash cows till you are in a financial position to make a more innovative game to satify the customers need of more innovative game play. This also requires the hardware innovation to make this possible. Nintendo is doing it every console now and Sony is doing this with VR.

To be honest, Nintendo already opened up Pandora's Box and has made upgrading systems mid-cycle a standard. They did it with the DS —> DSi and they did it with the 3DS. Now Sony is doing it. The last thing we need is for Sony and MS to release a new console mid cycle. Of all the things Sony has blatantly ripped off from Nintendo, I hope this is the one time they don't.
Nintendo did not do this just to be different to everyone else. Nintendo did it because it wanted to release consoles when it felt like the best time was. Nintendo did not want to be stuck to a forced release cycle. It gives Nintendo more flexibility to release things when they are actually ready. I reckon MS and Sony should do the same. Not release mid cycle. I mean abandon the whole set time scale cycle idea all together. Reelease consoles and other things when they are ready, not when an arbitary cycle demands they do so.

Sony had other issues on it's mind when it released the PS4. Namely all the bad PS3 issues. I think a clean break from the PS3 was more on Sony's mind than Nintendo breaking the console cycle. I'm not sure what MS made of it, but releasing the next Xbox inline with the next PS would be a smart move. So they are not fighting with customers already financially invested in the next PS.

@Spirit I think one of the most frustrating parts is that Nintendo has an IP for every genre of game you can imagine. Nintendo owns, fully or in part, shooters, racing games, RPGs, horror games, puzzlers, music/rhythm, action/adventure, etc.. There is not a genre that Nintendo couldn't make a game for with IPs they already own.

@Matt • A controller with no gimmicks, or at most, minimal gimmicks (i.e., the controller isn't the selling-point of the console)
• A unified online service (which is already coming, @DoomDash so that sort of thing that happened to you—and many others—does not happen again)
• Ease of portability, from the XBO and PS4 to NX
• A hard drive that is big enough for games, if digital downloads are going to be a thing for the NX
• The Virtual Console needs to come back with a bang; i.e., Wii Virtual Console level
  • I disagree with the first point. A unique wat to interact with the NX needs to be one of the major selling points of the NX. Nintendo also however need 1st party games that take advantage of it well. So that new innovation is the must have thing of the moment.
  • A proper online service I agree.
  • Ease of portability I agree with too. Supposedly Nintendo is working on this.
  • If the price of SSD flash is decent Nintendo should be doing this. 32GB is not enough these days. Especially when Nintendo is pushing the digital download idea pretty heavily these days.
  • I agree here. First have the Gamecube emulated on the NX. The NX is easily powerful for this. The Wii also? I don't know. If the NX is powerful to do it then I say go for it. They might have to be slightly modified thouigh to use a non Wiimote controller though. That is a good thing as Nintendo really needs the Wiimote to die. The NX is the perfect time to do this. In saying this, I am not sure how the NX will do WiiU games. The NX's different hardware makes having a direct WiiU mode on the NX trickier. I do not thinkt he NX would be powerfull enough to emulate NX games. If there is a part of the NX hardware dedicated to natively playing WiiU content, then that can be used also for the Wii content.
 
Last edited:

CrimsonCavalier

Fuzzy Pickles
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Location
United States
Gender
XY
I hope you are aware that the best thing for the industry is for itself to be making more profits. Primarily they are all still businesses.
Of course. But when profits come at the expense of the consumer, those profits will not sustain themselves.

Only a few radicals/revolutionaries like Iwata unstood that profits and what the gamers/customers really want to buy is totally intertwined. The heart of a gamer does influence their purchases. Iwata understood this more than anyone else ever in the gameing industry. That creates a conundrum though. Do you always appease the gamers or do you milk existing cash cows just for more profits? Nintendo seems to have a decent approach here. Milk the cash cows till you are in a financial position to make a more innovative game to satify the customers need of more innovative game play. This also requires the hardware innovation to make this possible. Nintendo is doing it every console now and Sony is doing this with VR.
I disagree that Nintendo is doing it with every console. The Wii had the opportunity to be the greatest console of all time. It's still a console with some spectacular games, and a unique way to play some of those games, but ultimately, it fell short by not meeting industry standards in terms of hardware.

The Wii U did not innovate in any way. Again, still a great console, with some of the best games out currently, but again, fell short in terms of hardware and the controller held it back.

Which is why I make my point later on about the controller needing to be gimmick-free. Like it or not, the gaming world as a whole is tired of "innovative" control methods.

Nintendo did not do this just to be different to everyone else. Nintendo did it because it wanted to release consoles when it felt like the best time was.
Nintendo did it to make a quick buck.


Nintendo did not want to be stuck to a forced release cycle. It gives Nintendo more flexibility to release things when they are actually ready. I reckon MS and Sony should do the same. Not release mid cycle. I mean abandon the whole set time scale cycle idea all together. Reelease consoles and other things when they are ready, not when an arbitary cycle demands they do so.
It isn't arbitrary. Cycles are in place for a reason. They give the consumer more "bang for the buck". Making a $300+ purchase on a piece of hardware is an investment. As a consumer, you expect this investment to last you more than 2-3 years. Because you're not just making the hardware purchase: you're making software and peripheral purchases as well, and—in the case of MS and Sony—you're paying for monthly subscriptions to online accounts.

By your theory, all three companies could release "updated" versions of new hardware every 2-3 years. I mean, PCs are upgradable literally multiple times a year, so if you like, Nintendo could release the NX, NX 2.0 and NX 3.0 all within a two year period, and that would be okay? Absolutely not.

  • I disagree with the first point. A unique wat to interact with the NX needs to be one of the major selling points of the NX. Nintendo also however need 1st party games that take advantage of it well. So that new innovation is the must have thing of the moment.
Like I said, I feel like the majority of the industry is tired of "unique" control methods. I think the Wii Controller was the way to go, but Nintendo didn't stick with it, and now it's too late. The Game Pad was a failure. I promise you no one wants a gimmicky controller anymore. Thus, Nintendo can't afford to make the Wii and Wii U mistake a third time.

If there is going to be innovation, it has to come from elsewhere. I'm not against Nintendo trying something new, unique, or even rebellious, but it simply can't come from the controller. The time for that may come in the future, but the NX can't afford to take a gamble, and a gimmicky controller is a gamble, and one that will fail based on precedent.
 

Emma

Eye See You
Site Staff
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Location
Vegas
Gender
Female
It isn't arbitrary. Cycles are in place for a reason. They give the consumer more "bang for the buck". Making a $300+ purchase on a piece of hardware is an investment. As a consumer, you expect this investment to last you more than 2-3 years. Because you're not just making the hardware purchase: you're making software and peripheral purchases as well, and—in the case of MS and Sony—you're paying for monthly subscriptions to online accounts.
No, no. Just... no. Cycles are not fixed. Despite what anyone wants to think, there is no industry agreement to start a new gen every five years. It is a horrifyingly bad idea. Cycles last however long they need to last. Being on the bleeding edge of technology is not really that important. And, in fact, it's actually toxic to gaming. Newer, more powerful hardware is more expensive to develop for and actually takes a couple years to stablize, even if more powerful hardware is built in the meantime. Having to work around multiple different hardware configurations greatly increases both costs and development time. If consoles were updated regularly, or we had a PC structure where there were updates throughout each year, developing a stable game would be impossible. Besides, power isn't everything. You can't ignore it completely but it doesn't have to be so important that it screws over everything else. Nintendo themselves proved you can still make a weak console work if you do it right.

The last gen was so long because of the economic crash of 2008. Only big banks got bailed out. All other businesses and people are still bleeding from it. It affected the whole planet. Development cost is skyrocketing but prices of consoles and games have been relatively static. We're in a very delicate position. The people simply can't afford to get consoles that fast. Let alone regular PC upgrades. The PC elitist community that can and does afford this represents an incredibly tiny minority of gamers. Not nearly enough for developers to recover their production costs. If consoles were built too often, the increased cost of the newer tech would vastly increase the development costs and the oversaturation of the market would mean less people would buy it, making it very unlikely they'd break even.

I could go on but you get the idea. Short, five year cycles, or shorter, are a horrifyingly bad idea that would destroy the gaming industry. I groan every single time people insist on the five year cycle. With a super groan when they compare it to PCs. Like it or not, but PC gamers wouldn't get their games either if we did it that way. Consoles with longer term cycles are absolutely essential to stabilize the gaming industry and protect it from disruptions like the economic crash.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom