Miyamoto Considers the Possibilty of Games Playable on Both Consoles and Handhelds

[JuicieJ]

So in an interview with Kotaku during E3 2014, Miyamoto was asked about Nintendo's statements on their plans to try and make the gaming devices they make next like "brothers in a family of systems" from their most recent fiscal report, and his response was this:

So, certainly if you look at the show floor, currently the games are designed for the systems they're running on. There are games that in a way take advantage of being on a higher-spec machine that plays on a TV and there are games that are designed to play better on a portable machine. But certainly we've gotten to an age where the technology has advanced and it's become more and more possible to have a similar experience running on a lower-spec system. And even within the Wii U itself we have the Virtual Console, which sort of is an exhibit of how you can have one type of play that is at a higher-spec level and another type of play at a lower-spec level as well. So certainly I think there is possibility in that area in the future.

So, this is a bit of a tangent, but five years ago I think the industry was at a point where many game developers felt that, if they weren't creating games for the highest-spec machine, then they weren't going to get work, that the business would go away.

But over the last five years we've seen that the range of devices that they develop for has expanded, so they're able to decide if they want to create something that is very high spec type of game or something that is for a lower-spec device. So I just think it's good to see the freedom of choice that developers now have.

What I can say is, certainly, within Nintendo the fact that our development environment for our home console is different from the development environment for our portable system is certainly an area of stress or challenge for the development teams. So as we move forward, we're going to look at what we can do to unify the two development environments.

So, particularly with digital downloads now and the idea that you're downloading the right to play a game, that opens up the ability to have multiple platform digital downloads where you can download on one and download on another. Certainly from a development standpoint there is some challenge to it, because if you have two devices that have different specs and you're being told to design in a way that the game runs on both devices, then that can be challenging for the developer—but if you have a more unified development environment and you're able to make one game that runs on both systems instead of having to make a game for each system, that's an area of opportunity for us.

This is very good news. While there hasn't been any kind of official ANNOUNCEMENT that this is happening, the fact that Miyamoto is contemplating is could be a game-changer for Nintendo in the 9th Generation of gaming. Basically, this means that Nintendo could make games that are playable on both a console and a handheld through digital downloading -- and this is exactly the kind of concept I thought of when I read Nintendo's fiscal report.

I considered making a thread on the topic back a few months ago when Nintendo released said report, but I decided not to. Now that Miyamoto has said exactly what I was thinking though, I feel that it's time for me to speak up about it. Nintendo should definitely do this. Imagine being able to purchase a brand-new game for either of Nintendo's next-gen consoles (that's the 9th Generation, people!) and then be able to play it on the other. Imagine being able to play one of Nintendo's handheld games on the big screen without any worry about the resolution being too low. Imagine being able to take one of their console games on the go without any worry of it being too advanced for the hardware. It's a brilliant concept!

Nintendo's always been a major innovative force in the industry, so Miyamoto thinking of this doesn't surprise me at all. Still, I'm really glad that he DID, because that means there's hope for the thing I thought of and wanted them to do so badly becoming a reality. Make it happen, Miyamoto! Make it happen!!

 

[Salem]

Meaning the next Nintendo console will be both a handheld and main console at the same time?

Wasn't there a rumour of something to the sort happening? I dunno where they got their sources but it's odd.

 

[DarkestLink]

This...sounds like a cannibalistic business practice. Why even buy both Nintendo systems now?

 

[JuicieJ]

Meaning the next Nintendo console will be both a handheld and main console at the same time?

Not necessarily. I think if Nintendo were to go through with this, they would just have a console and a handheld that have extremely similar architecture so that they could play the same games.

Wasn't there a rumour of something to the sort happening? I dunno where they got their sources but it's odd.

Yeah, the Fusion.

This...sounds like a cannibalistic business practice. Why even buy both Nintendo systems now?

Because there would most likely be (technically) exclusive games that you have to buy on one device in order to play it on the other?

 

[Salem]

This...sounds like a cannibalistic business practice. Why even buy both Nintendo systems now?

No not nessecarly.

Think of the iPhone and iPad, there're software that work on both but the same people buy both devices for different reasons.

 

[Fig]

While I like the mentality that Miyamoto has for the future of Nintendo as it shows that he always has something in mind for the future for Nintendo, which should be the case for any developer in my opinion. Given the fact that he is one of the older staff members in Nintendo's history in the gaming industry, it is always a pleasure to hear what the man has to say. I wouldn't doubt Nintendo would probably make the rumored "Fusion" become a reality when the ninth generation of gaming begins. I do believe the concept of merging the console and handleheld products into one full-fledged system seems promising, especially when it would mean that there will be a one-time purchase for every game so it could still be played on either the television or on the go using the handheld aspect of the system. I do have concerns pertaining to that system though.

While I do believe that the new system for the ninth generation of gaming for Nintendo does seem promising, I do have concerns for it. If this were to be the next console after the Wii U, I think the aspect that majorly concerns me is the handheld portion of the console. While it all seems well and thought-out, I can't help but wonder just how limited it could potentially be. If it's anything like the Wii U Gamepad, chances are the handheld factor of the console would be very limited and probably still enclose the player within the boundaries of the home environment. Now if it is anything like the current 3DS/2DS family systems then sign me up immediately! The 3DS is really the best way to enjoy on-the-go gaming without being restricted to be in proximity of where the console is established. This is so far my only concern for the console if it does indeed becomes Nintendo's new video game system after the Wii U.

 

[DarkestLink]

If they do this, I see a strong possibility in their system being weaker than their competitors so it can still be handheld and also the possibility of it being very different from its competitors, which will, I imagine, once again shoo away the third parties.

 

[Salem]

If they do this, I see a strong possibility in their system being weaker than their competitors so it can still be handheld and also the possibility of it being very different from its competitors, which will, I imagine, once again shoo away the third parties.

Not necessarily, I mean the 3DS was the most popular handheld at the moment, so it attracted most of the third-parties so...

 

[DarkestLink]

Not necessarily, I mean the 3DS was the most popular handheld at the moment, so it attracted most of the third-parties so...

But does it compare to the consoles? I think not. If Nintendo were to make their handheld and home console the same, wouldn't they need to lower the power of it to match the handheld?

 

[JuicieJ]

But does it compare to the consoles? I think not. If Nintendo were to make their handheld and home console the same, wouldn't they need to lower the power of it to match the handheld?

I take it you don't understand that having the same kind of architecture doesn't mean having the same amount of horsepower.

Look at how gaming PC's work: all different kinds of horsepower, but they're all x86 machines, so they have no trouble playing the same games. To compensate for the differences in horsepower, though, PC versions of games have different visual quality settings, that way all the different potential builds can be supported. This is exactly the kind of thing Nintendo could do with their next console & handheld -- have the handheld version use a lower quality, and the console version use a higher quality. Best part is, since they would be using different sized screens, the visible difference between the two would be minimal, even though they'd be very different in all reality.

It's a brilliant concept that Nintendo should without question take advantage of come next generation.

 

[Évariste]

This sounds like a great idea, although I only have concern about marketing the concept: Why do I have to buy the home console to play a particular game when it clearly plays fine on the handheld console? I get the feeling that most games would have to be exclusive to either console. Also, the consoles would probably have to be marketed as distinct consoles in order to avoid possibility of cannibalization. This may lead to a contradiction if their incredible compatibility is to be a selling feature.

Assuming the system works smoothly and there are plenty of games that utilize this feature, there is great potential upside. If one console is undersupported by software, then the other console gives consumers a reason to buy the other if the other console is well-supported. So I think the floor amount for quantity demanded would be higher. It would probably be necessary for the combined libraries of the two consoles to be comparable to what exists between 3DS+WiiU or DS+Wii though.

 

[JuicieJ]

I get the feeling that most games would have to be exclusive to either console. Also, the consoles would probably have to be marketed as distinct consoles in order to avoid possibility of cannibalization.

That's exactly the kind of situation I envision.

 

[Clank]

This is something that the R&C series has previously dabbled in. To be quite blunt, it's a horrible idea. They took the path of making the game all cool and stuff for the home console (aka the PS3), then had to strip stuff out to port it to the handheld (the Vita), but you've also got to keep in mind that the Vita is by no means a wimp in terms of hardware power, even compared to the PS3.

The other option is to develop for both at the same time, but you end up either on the above path, or you weaken the console experience; Neither of which is desirable.

Honestly, I would suggest just keeping them totally separate. I mean with the path that R&C took with the ports, it made the handheld experience obviously inferior and somewhat buggy, something that certainly didn't help the Vita's reputation. On the other hand, if you take the opposite route, you end up with the issue of making your home console look weaker than it already it.

The path that Nintendo is taking with SSB is actually quite interesting, unless I'm mistaken they are literally developing two separate games with no connection. This is slightly dangerous in my opinion, because if there's confusion about what the Wii U is, then I would hate to imagine the confused parents when they try to buy SSB for their kid. But I don't recall anyone taking this path before, so we will have to see what happens.


Basically, I think that as long as the hardware market stays where it is (powerful home consoles and weak handhelds), it just simply isn't feasible to do this, possible, but not feasible.

This...sounds like a cannibalistic business practice. Why even buy both Nintendo systems now?

Because the home console would have better graphics and the handheld would be more portable. Not to mention, if they follow the path that R&C took, you buy the game for one console and have it for free on the other, so isn't really trying to suck more money out of the consumer.

I take it you don't understand that having the same kind of architecture doesn't mean having the same amount of horsepower.

Look at how gaming PC's work: all different kinds of horsepower, but they're all x86 machines, so they have no trouble playing the same games. To compensate for the differences in horsepower, though, PC versions of games have different visual quality settings, that way all the different potential builds can be supported. This is exactly the kind of thing Nintendo could do with their next console & handheld -- have the handheld version use a lower quality, and the console version use a higher quality. Best part is, since they would be using different sized screens, the visible difference between the two would be minimal, even though they'd be very different in all reality.

It's a brilliant concept that Nintendo should without question take advantage of come next generation.

Actually, there's an issue there, based on what I've been told by people in performance computing, for single threaded performance x86 is more powerful than arm, but draws a lot more power. This makes arm quite popular in devices that run from a battery, such as a handheld since you get much more performance per watt.
For a home console you don't really care about power too much (I don't really care if my console draws 180 watts instead of 20, even if that only delivers twice the experience), so people tend to opt for a more power-hungry and more powerful architecture.
Besides, look at the Ouya, that was an arm based console, laughably underpowered compared to the competition, yet I can almost guarantee that it has better performance per watt when you compare it to most any gaming PC or home console.

My point is that if you try to stick with the same architecture for both home and handheld consoles, you are either sacrificing how powerful the machine is or battery life (who wants a handheld that only lasts for an hour or two?), so I personally am against such an idea.

 

[JuicieJ]

This is something that the R&C series has previously dabbled in. To be quite blunt, it's a horrible idea. They took the path of making the game all cool and stuff for the home console (aka the PS3), then had to strip stuff out to port it to the handheld (the Vita), but you've also got to keep in mind that the Vita is by no means a wimp in terms of hardware power, even compared to the PS3.

The PS3 had that horrible, horrible CELL architecture that made it a nightmare to program games for. Is it really surprising that this kind of thing happened?

If you want a true example of the Vita playing a full console game, look no further than Rayman Legends. This was a game developed exclusively for the Wii U and ported over to other platforms, including the Vita -- and guess what? It runs every bit as smoothly on the handheld as it does on all the other platforms.

The other option is to develop for both at the same time, but you end up either on the above path, or you weaken the console experience; Neither of which is desirable.

It would be a transferable data situation due to the devices having the same core architecture.

Basically, I think that as long as the hardware market stays where it is (powerful home consoles and weak handhelds), it just simply isn't feasible to do this, possible, but not feasible.

If Miyamoto, the king of game development himself, thinks something would be a cool idea, I'd think twice about questioning it.

Because the home console would have better graphics and the handheld would be more portable.

And your point is? That's how gaming has always been.

Not to mention, if they follow the path that R&C took, you buy the game for one console and have it for free on the other, so isn't really trying to suck more money out of the consumer.

That's... the point. Why would you think Nintendo would attempt to swindle their consumers?

Actually, there's an issue there, based on what I've been told by people in performance computing, for single threaded performance x86 is more powerful than arm, but draws a lot more power. This makes arm quite popular in devices that run from a battery, such as a handheld since you get much more performance per watt.
For a home console you don't really care about power too much (I don't really care if my console draws 180 watts instead of 20, even if that only delivers twice the experience), so people tend to opt for a more power-hungry and more powerful architecture.
Besides, look at the Ouya, that was an arm based console, laughably underpowered compared to the competition, yet I can almost guarantee that it has better performance per watt when you compare it to most any gaming PC or home console.

My point is that if you try to stick with the same architecture for both home and handheld consoles, you are either sacrificing how powerful the machine is or battery life (who wants a handheld that only lasts for an hour or two?), so I personally am against such an idea.

And when did I say that Nintendo's next devices have to be x86 machines? Answer: never. I only said that in reference to PC's because that's what they have. Do you really think that Nintendo wouldn't develop their own specific architecture to make this kind of thing work with efficiency?

 

[Emma]

The exact same game on both systems is just not feasible. Not for how Nintendo does things. Their handhelds are usually equivalent to two gens behind current home console. GB = pre-NES systems, GBC = NES, GBA = SNES, DS=N64, 3DS = GCN.
Not exactly of course, but roughly enough that each handheld could handle ports from the indicated systems. The next handheld would be somewhere between the Wii and Wii U in power. Since the Wii was just a repackaged GCN.

Nintendo doesn't make their handhelds powerful like Sony does. This is not necessarily a bad thing of course. For one, it means longer battery life and less price. Also, Nintendo doesn't often take games to their maximum potential on the systems. But there's a reason for that, making the models and textures less sophisticated means more space on the cartridge for more content. It does mean it can't share games with the current system. But why should it have to. Why not if you buy a digital version of a game on one system, you get the rights to a digital version of the game built specifically for the other instead of a ported copy? That's more logical. If Nintendo is really going to do this, that's how it'd have to be done.