Nintendo's "Mystery Device" Revealed

[B@SS_SHOCK]

Is this what we want instead of the upcoming PSP and Ngage II?

Nintendo said it would give gamers "a unique entertainment experience for the 21st century."

The three-inch screens are held in the palm and are supposed to give players two different views of a game.

IMO I don't think this is what people want. This concept would be insanely great for RPG's and such but what other uses does the other screen have? Also u can bet hardly any third-party support for it as well. Expect this thing to go the way of the Virtual Boy. Anyways I'd like to see pics before I completely judge the thing, so looks like we'll have to wait for E3 in May.

What's your opinion?

 

[srobert]

Interesting but I would definitly not purchase this portable gaming device on the first year. I would have to wait and see if developpers can come up with good games and in fair enough numbers for it.

I beleive Nintendo can come up with a decent price for this portable console.

I wonder how big the console will be with two screens sitting on top of each other. This components will have to be light enough so you don't tire your wrist after an hour of play.

Sony's PSP is will be too expensive and thus will be a novelty for rich kids. I think the PSP is trying to do to much.

 

[iGav]

I think Nintendo are going the way of the SEGA.... games only world...

I read somewhere that it's predicted that by '08 Nintendo will be out of the console business altogether, even their next gen console is rumoured to be of lesser specs than both the PS3 and XBox 2 and targetted at a different audience.

Only time will tell I guess if they can pull it off, but sales of the Cube don't bode well really do they.

 

[x86isslow]

hrmm... could apple afford to buy out nintendo? it would give macs more games, and nintendo could get a much bigger r&d budget

 

[topicolo]

Originally posted by x86isslow
hrmm... could apple afford to buy out nintendo? it would give macs more games, and nintendo could get a much bigger r&d budget

It wouldn't be a good idea at all. First of all, apple is smaller than nintendo ($8billion market cap vs. $13 billion). Second, nintendo has NO experience making mac games (or computer games AT ALL for that matter) and it would waste an extraordinary amount of money just to retrain their employees to focus on the pc when console game sales are many times greater. Third, forcing a large company like the hypothetical apple-nintendo, which is already "embattled," to expend resources specifically on entering a new market (the mac) would decimate the reserves of both companies. Finally, why would Jobs want to focus ALL of apple's resources on something completely unproven to be profitable for apple (jumping into the games market), when their other businesses are doing so well? (iPods, powerbooks, etc).

Basically, Apple has an almost 0% chance of buying Nintendo. Even if the companies somehow merged, it would be a death wish for both companies and we'll be without nintendo games and apple products shortly afterwards.

 

[Thanatoast]

topicolo-

i disagree. nintendo and apple working together would be the death of neither. the one place apple really falls behind is in gaming. if they can get a credible company to develop games for them, then i say more power to them. gamecubes already run on the ppc, don't they? how hard could it be for nintendo to develop apple games. a buyout would be less likely than some kind of absorbtion, where nintendo just kind of fades into apple, assuming that they really are on the ropes, that is.

bottom line, if i could plug in a controller and play nintendo games on my mac, that would be a huge incentive to purchase. mariokart alone could sell imac units.

 

[alxths]

It's an interesting product... I don't think any of us should really judge it until we've had a chance to see what it has to offer at E3.

Also worth mentioning, this new hand-held device isn't meant to combat the PSP. Nintendo will be releasing a successor to the GBA as well... this is supposed to be a litle different.

 

[Counterfit]

Originally posted by Thanatoast
gamecubes already run on the ppc, don't they? how hard could it be for nintendo to develop apple games.

There's a large difference between the PPC in the GameCube and the G3/4/5 chips used in Macs. M$ released NT for PPC a while back, and you can't run on it on a Mac, as it was designed for server applications (IBM stuff that is)

 

[topicolo]

Originally posted by Thanatoast
topicolo-

i disagree. nintendo and apple working together would be the death of neither. the one place apple really falls behind is in gaming. if they can get a credible company to develop games for them, then i say more power to them. gamecubes already run on the ppc, don't they? how hard could it be for nintendo to develop apple games. a buyout would be less likely than some kind of absorbtion, where nintendo just kind of fades into apple, assuming that they really are on the ropes, that is.

bottom line, if i could plug in a controller and play nintendo games on my mac, that would be a huge incentive to purchase. mariokart alone could sell imac units.

Just being on the same family of processor does not in any way mean that half of the battle is over. There's still the matter of integrating tons of mac OS specific code to make any game work. I'm not even sure if the gamecube processor is binary compatible with the G4s and G5s in current macs.
Besides, nintendo generally caters to a younger audience which generally has much less money the 18-34 year old demographic. If you add that to the fact that the mac user base is much smaller than the pc user base, which is much smaller than the console user base, you can see how Nintendo would not make ANY money making mac specific games.
If the companies merge (the only way it would happen), Nintendo would be controlling Apple, not the other way around (due to its greater value). Jobs may be demoted down to 2nd in command and the entire company would be nothing like the apple we know and love today.
The bottom line is money. A nintendo/apple merger would not make any. If there's no money in the merger, it won't happen and shouldn't happen. Just because you think you would buy more macs if a nintendo-apple made games for its machines doesn't mean that everyone will. I seriously doubt any merger could ever happen

 

[joker2]

hmm

Sounds like something they're already doing with hooking Game Boy Advances up to the console... see http://www.electronicsboutique.com/ebx/product/234185.asp for Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles

Using the Game Boy Advance as a controller, players are able to control their characters on-screen, while receiving unique information on the Game Boy Advance screen which other players cannot see.

 

[Thanatoast]

pessimist.

here's my take. nintendo is primarily a software company that makes consoles to sell their games. why would they not want to open a new market for themselves on the mac? apple is a computer company who's always getting knocked for being behind on the gaming front. why would they not want someone to develop games for them?

 

[Counterfit]

Nintendo primarily a software company? Um, no.... read this too

 

[Sol]

The Next Big Thing in gamming: dual displays

Trust Nintendo to come out with something so unpredictable. Dual screen gaming would get the creative juices flowing in every game devoloper out there and give us players something that is not just faster than what came before. Such a product would need some amazing launch software to prove its viability but if anyone can do that, it would be Nintendo.

If it takes off I imagine that this hand-held will change the face of gamming for the next decade. Every game will have multiple angles on the screen and some PC games might even start supporting dual displays (a standard feature on all G4 and G5 PowerMacs). Graphics cards are up to the task but no developer has been daring enough to do this yet.

 

[Thanatoast]

Counterfit, those were interesting articles, but they talk about Nintendo's past. What is the current share of profit that comes from games vs hardware?

 

[johnnowak]

And two screens is better than one wide screen because...

This is stupid.

 

[johnnyjibbs]

The article that mentioned that Nintendo may not be in the hardware business by 2008 also said that it would be dangerous to underestimate Nintendo.

The Cube may be suffering due to its image (unfairly I think, and it's a great machine). Just like the Dreamcast failed despite being a great machine, the GameCube is still being overshadowed by the problems of the (still-brilliant) N64 before it, which suffered from a lack of games (and quality ones from 3rd parties - but Nintendo's games were worth the price).

Like Apple, Nintendo likes to be different. And in this day and age, that's great for people like us who "see the light". But most people offer for the more 'normal' things (like PC/PS2/XBox). I love my GameCube and its purple colour, but purple was a mistake (I know you can get black) because it looked more like a toy. "For kids" was what everyone was saying. Beating the dizzy heights of Mario 64 and Zelda: Ocarina of Time and Goldeneye has been very difficult for Nintendo too.

Nintendo/Apple merger? I highly doubt it. Both companies have a lot in common: secretive, very stubborn, innovative and [now] occupy niche markets (not including GBA). However, games are not the Mac's forte, and, while playing Mario on my PowerBook would be superb, Nintendo would never let it happen (too stubborn!)

I'm intrigued about this. I really hope this works out for Nintendo.

 

[hvfsl]

Originally posted by iGAV
I think Nintendo are going the way of the SEGA.... games only world...

I read somewhere that it's predicted that by '08 Nintendo will be out of the console business altogether, even their next gen console is rumoured to be of lesser specs than both the PS3 and XBox 2 and targetted at a different audience.

Only time will tell I guess if they can pull it off, but sales of the Cube don't bode well really do they.

The Xbox 2 and GC 2 will have almost exactly the same specs. They will have the same ATI graphics chip and the same PPC G5 (or even G6 by then) cpu. So I dont know where you got that from. Unless IBM can increase the speeds to around 5GHz in time for M$ and Nintendo to include those chips in their consoles, the PS3 will blow both consoles away with its Cell Chip.

 

[imac_japan]

I live in Japan and the Japanese will buy from only Japanese companies...

The X-box failed because -
1) it was too big
2) The software library for the PS2 is too big
3) No RPG's
4) American company...

Most (I work for the largest English school chain in Japan) kids here have a Game Boy either SP or advance and the Gameboy has thousands of games.

Sony is for adults here, Nintendo is for Children. Sony will charge too much for the PSP as many parents have said to me - the price of the gameboy is not that expensive.

 

[Laslo Panaflex]

Originally posted by johnnowak
And two screens is better than one wide screen because...

This is stupid.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. . .

Oh and another thing, for all the people debating whether or not Apple and Nintendo will merge, buyout, whatever. It will never happen. Nintendo is a console game developer, meaning it makes games only for consoles, specifically their console. The main reason why they do this is because they have control of the hardware, and the game will run perfectly on every system, just how the game designers made it, thats the beauty of consoles. Heck, even cross platform console games have performance differences, I can't imagine Nintendo developing for such a wide range of hardware, (even on the mac side) When they have only developed on one specific peice of hardware per gerneration of console.

The only thing I see happening is Nintendo developing for other consoles, not PC or PPC. I think that most likely they will make another console, and if that fails, go on with the Gameboy, which is where they make their money anyway.

 

[FlamDrag]

One screen or two, dual views is a very interesting concept for nearly any game available - don't be short-sighted and dismiss it as "stupid."

For example, imagine playing a FPS game such as Quake and having a separately controlled drone camera that you can fly around corners and into dangerous areas (even through small cracks in walls) to do recon for you.

Or park it in the corner of a room and act as a hidden camera to see where your opponents are in a particular room.

Of course, your drone would be prone to being shot and killed just like any thing else.

Talk about a new dimension to these types of games.

Have some imagination.

 

[srobert]

Some of us have already experienced 2-screens play with the gamebube/gameboy combo on the latest Zelda title.

You used the mainscreen for gaming purpose and the gameboy screen was used to use special inventory items, look at maps, explore ahead for secret items, etc. It was the first gamecube game that made good use of this technology.

I think that the upcoming title Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles will also be using this technology.

2 screens might not be a nessecity but if done well, it could be an interesting feature.

 

[johnnyjibbs]

Originally posted by hvfsl
The Xbox 2 and GC 2 will have almost exactly the same specs. They will have the same ATI graphics chip and the same PPC G5 (or even G6 by then) cpu. So I dont know where you got that from. Unless IBM can increase the speeds to around 5GHz in time for M$ and Nintendo to include those chips in their consoles, the PS3 will blow both consoles away with its Cell Chip.

The processor power of a console is only half the story. The PS2 continues to sell the best despite having the worst graphics and slowest CPU. The Xbox has the edge on GameCube in the speed stakes. However, there is little between the 3 consoles and they can all play the same games. The same will happen with the next race.

However, like Apple, Nintendo struggled with a speed problem similar to the megaherz myth. It's hard to convince people that an 800MHz G4 is faster than an 800MHz Pentium. Nintendo originally stated 6-12 million polygons/second instead of PS2's quoted 75 million or Xbox's 100-150 million. We all know that Sony and Microsoft gave very theoretical numbers that were based on non-game mechanics and wireframe graphics. Nintendo's estimate was for real world games. The point is, the general public doesn't know that, so Nintendo's console seemed less powerful.

Nintendo's marketing is what needs to improve. Their advertising has never been that good compared to Xbox and PS2. Unfortunately people buy the other consoles for the Playstation or Xbox brand, despite the problems with the controllers and average games (in general). This new console is exciting and intriguing, but could be another virtual boy if third parties don't cotton on to its potential.

 

[srobert]

I've got both a gamecube and a playstation and I love both. Some games look better on the gamecube, some look better on the PS2. (cross-console games)

What I like the best about the gamecube is the size of the mini-dvd the'ye using. I often thought that loading time seemed shorter on the cube. Maybe it is just me, maybe it's a programming issue or maybe it's because of the smaller size of the disks.

I think that the biggest flaw of the gamecube is the lack of titles. Sure it got plenty of awesome titles, and exclusives one too. But it hhapens to often that I see a major game released on both PS2 and X-Box but not on gamecube. It also seems that the game section dedicated to gamebuce in video rental stores is always the smallest of the 3.

Let's hope that the next nintendo console will be able to play earlier generation games. The PS2 scored big points with that feature and it seems that the PS3 will paly both PS1 and PS2 games too.

Well, I love it anyway... and it's sooo easy to carry around I also love the gameboy player cube ad-on.

 

[johnnyjibbs]

Originally posted by srobert
I've got both a gamecube and a playstation and I love both. Some games look better on the gamecube, some look better on the PS2. (cross-console games)

What I like the best about the gamecube is the size of the mini-dvd the'ye using. I often thought that loading time seemed shorter on the cube. Maybe it is just me, maybe it's a programming issue or maybe it's because of the smaller size of the disks.

Yep, the short loading times are due to a mixture of the physical size of the discs (laser has less far to travel) and clever programming (that's why Nintendo games such as Mariokart have no loading).

Let's hope that the next nintendo console will be able to play earlier generation games. The PS2 scored big points with that feature and it seems that the PS3 will paly both PS1 and PS2 games too.

The problem with this is it means they are bound by the GameCube's limitations in the next console. For example, the PS2 had to inheret the rubbish playstation controller (still with "anaolgue on" buttons). This would require the next console to have the same button layout (even if I do like the GC controller). Also, I don't think many people play their old Playstation games on their PS2 - it certainly wouldn't be the killer feature that would tempt me to buy one.

The GameCube does need more games though. It's a pity that, due to kiddy image, 3rd parties don't want to develop for it --> less games --> poorer sales --> 3rd parties don't want to develop for it --> even fewer games....vicious circle. Like the N64, it was high risk - make a decent game (e.g. Goldeneye) and you make a killing, but most games didn't sell well because they were ?!@*?@!

 

[Sol]

Tech specs not THAT relevant to fun

Originally posted by johnnyjibbs
However, like Apple, Nintendo struggled with a speed problem similar to the megaherz myth. It's hard to convince people that an 800MHz G4 is faster than an 800MHz Pentium. Nintendo originally stated 6-12 million polygons/second instead of PS2's quoted 75 million or Xbox's 100-150 million. We all know that Sony and Microsoft gave very theoretical numbers that were based on non-game mechanics and wireframe graphics. Nintendo's estimate was for real world games. The point is, the general public doesn't know that, so Nintendo's console seemed less powerful.

You might be right that the general perception is that the GameCube and indeed the GameBoy Advance are underpowered but this is true only if you look at the specifications of the hardware out of the context of their software. There are too many know-it-alls that fail to be impressed by a new console because it has X amount of memory or 'only' three-digit MHz for its CPU. I blame the video game media for this because they love to hype The Next Big Thing and making their readers feel like what they have now is not worth getting excited about if it is not The Latest & The Greatest.

Nintendo has always produced the goods when it comes to complete game experiences which are seemingly uncompromised by technical limitations. When people played Mario 64 they could not care less that the N64 had a polygon limit lower than the competing PlayStation. All they cared about was that the game was fun to play, a sentiment that is lost on most developers and publishers. To this day Nintendo continues to focus on providing complete game experiences that are fun to play and for this they have been relegated to the corner of the video-games industry.