All Channels
Popular
310°

Nintendo Admits Its Not "Totally Secure" With Making A Generational Transition

In a financial briefing Q&A, Nintendo president Shuntaro Furukawa shared strategies for a smooth generational transition to the next console.

Neonridr837d ago

Ultimately it comes down to whether or not the Switch 2 is fully backwards compatible. If it plays all Switch titles out of the box, then I don't feel you have to worry as much. Just make sure you give it a name that's clear that it's a new system. I know they don't like numbers, but just keep it simple.

jznrpg837d ago

Backward compatibility is important for Nintendo but it also needs to be a good jump in power or why would people upgrade ?

Neonridr837d ago

I think they can offer both. No reason why the next Switch couldn't play existing games, possibly even with patches for improved performance / resolution.

fr0sty837d ago

It's Nintendo... Switch is barely more powerful than a PS3, and it was meant to compete with PS4/Xbone, here it is still going up against PS5/XSX. I wouldn't expect much more than a PS4 from its successor.

DarXyde837d ago

More than anything, I feel the important consideration is whether it *feels* generationally different.

Wii was not at all a big step up from GameCube. It was lagging behind the OG Xbox in terms of performance. But it certainly didn't play like GameCube, and I think that's what Nintendo is good at: where Xbox signals a new generation vertically, Nintendo does so more in a horizontal manner where performance improves, but the emphasis is on doing something in a new way. Playstation is somewhere in-between with a diagonal approach, including big leap in power and—thanks to VR and Dualsense features—can also change the experience in a horizontal manner.

Cacabunga836d ago

Wii U was backward compatible not only with games but also all wii accessories.. i think it’s not about that it’s the marketing must be done right..
The Wii U is a very solid well built console but people has no idea what it was..

If they follow same principe as Switch they should clearly call it Switch 2 or something totally different not Switch U or something to make people think it’s a switch add-on.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 836d ago
boing1837d ago

Sounds like it's not fully compatible.

Profchaos837d ago

It's the curse of Nintendo they need to make people understand this is a new console and not a add on the Wii U had full backwards compatibility but that didn't work

Nebaku837d ago

I think it's funny that Nintendo's PR have actually convinced fans the Wii U flopped because of "unclear naming".

Because we all know consumers were so baffled by the "Super" Nintendo, Gameboy "Advance", and "3"DS that they didn't sell, right?

The Wii U flopped because it was both underpowered AND a gimmick system. A gimmick that wasn't even that compelling, unlike the original Wii's or 3DS's.

Wintersun616836d ago

If they're afraid of numbers, they can just call it Swap.

gerbintosh836d ago

Or just go with Super Switch. Just don't name it Switch U

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 836d ago
ChasterMies837d ago (Edited 837d ago )

The Switch 2 has to compete with the Switch.

gold_drake837d ago (Edited 837d ago )

yeh, this is definitely similiar to the "ps2 to ps3" moment.

where the last one was so amazing and sold so much that going forward u dont rly know what to do with it the new one haha

but im sure they figure it out.

Tacoboto837d ago

The PS2 to PS3 transition was a unique beast of self-fulfilling near-sabotage.

The marketing was a disaster. They suggested customers work a second job. It was a year behind its direct competition and up to $200 more expensive. The development environment was not friendly and was responsible for the PS3 spending the vast majority of the generation with inferior third-party titles relative to 360. The launch controller didn't have rumble and the early games utilizing Six-Axis under-delivered.

Unless the Switch 2 is $500, Nintendo gets arrogant and belittles their customers *and* developers, I don't get how this could be similar at all to PS2 -> PS3.

gold_drake837d ago (Edited 837d ago )

thanks for the technical, production and advertisment aspect of my general statemant, that didnt really ask for anything but "wow sold so much, what to do with the next one" haha.

ApocalypseShadow837d ago (Edited 837d ago )

Lie after lie doesn't make this true.

Sony never suggested you get a second job. The media spread the falsehood that Sony said it. In reality, Sony said that you would work a little more to get a PS3. Which is true. That's what Ken said.

PS1 was $299. PS2 was $299. PS3 was $499-$599 with everything built in and full BC. Obviously, if you have common sense, you WOULD have to work a little more to get a PS3 compared to the previous consoles.

What the media said was stuff like in this Engadget article
https://www.engadget.com/20...

Working more hours to buy a more expensive system isn't saying get two jobs.

It was a year behind yes. But it had more but cost less than if you put all those features in an Xbox 360. The memory cards, the proprietary HDD, the Wi-Fi adapter, the HD DVD player that didn't work for games, etc etc were all more in cost than buying a PS3 with everything built in.

Third parties struggled on multi chip design. The funny thing is that multi chip design is standard today with multiple cores. I'm order to get the most out of them, you spread the processing across them. Moore's Law one chip was hitting a brick wall. Everyone in the tech world knew this.

The ones who did use the cores made better looking games on PS3 and outclassed 360 with games like uncharted, GT, GOW, TLofU etc over 360.

But the lie about getting 2 jobs needs to go. Guess it's true that if you tell a lie enough, someone will eventually believe it.

You can disagree all you like. The truth is slapping you in the face.

Tacoboto837d ago

@Shadow

Ok. Tell me then. How are salaried workers going to earn more just by working more hours? I'll let you sit and think on that one.

The Cell architecture is not comparable to today's chips. Sony split the RAM pool and that was a significant hurdle for third party developers to overcome.

Your unhinged overly defensive essays continue to paint you as someone in need of help. Focus on yourself instead of defending Sony every chance you can possibly get. The Sony of today and PlayStation of today are so great because they learned and applied the lessons learned from the PS3 era.

UnbreakableAlex837d ago

I also remember Sony saying rumble was so last gen, nobody needs it ^^
That was so embarrassing like “realistic giant crab” and “you have to work more to be able to afford a PS3”.

Profchaos837d ago (Edited 837d ago )

@shadow I'm not sure how you got to any of those points.

I love PlayStation to I've been playing their systems even since the PS1 saying that I could say the same for Nintendo, Sega also. But I'm not going to rewrite or paint over the history and mistakes they made as anything but bad choices

Multi core chip isn't quite right the cell architecture is not based or related to modern day CPU x86 architecture which is instruction set and is still unique and the cell revolved around programming multiple spus in order. Your examples of those who perfected it were all first party which shows third party games almost always played worse on PS3.

It's important to remember if the cell architecture really was so great why didn't Sony and IBM continue their partnership.

This was the copies and pasted quote from ken so yes never said second job however clearly it's not a good look.
"for consumers to think to themselves 'I will work more hours to buy one'. We want people to feel that they want it, irrespective of anything else."

PS3 cost that much because of the Blu-ray tech and Sony made a huge loss on each PS3 sold so regardless Xbox was never going to come close to being as expensive even if they had WiFi they didn't need memory cards as the standard model had a 20gb drive the arcade model wasn't the main SKU and no one brought the hd DVD which was why it lost the format wars and that's for the best

Again let's not try and rewrite history because you don't like people insulting your favourite corporation.

The arrogant moments of a corporation blow back and we then get their best efforts to be pro consumer it resulted in the absolute perfection that was the PS4 launch

Levii_92836d ago

Tacoboto and with all that they ended up turning everything around surpasing MS in the end with sales. Not to mention plethora of awesome things like your console actually not dying, free online, tons and tons of awesome new exclusives and games, BD player and i'm sure i'm forgeting more stuff. That is why PS3 generation was the best Sony gen and my favourite.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 836d ago
ManMarmalade837d ago

This is starting to feel like another WiiU issue.

ManMarmalade837d ago

The WiiU wasn't a huge success partially because it seemed more like an add-on to the Wii and not a new console which was confusing for consumers.

Hereandthere837d ago

We can tell, they are milking the switch to death.

Profchaos837d ago

They sold another 15 million apparently they are probably like hey NVIDIA you guys mind waiting another year the switch 1 is still selling

Nintentional837d ago

Yes because it’s not because of the quality exclusives, no one’s buying Switches for those right? Switch has way more quality exclusive software than PS5/Xbox Series combined.

badz149837d ago

Yeah... It's not like it was released in 2017 or something, right?

Show all comments (47)
60°

Take-Two CEO Once Again Side Steps Grand Theft Auto 6 Price Point

Strauss Zelnick says price of GTA 6 is being carefully considered and that Rockstar is focused on "making the most spectacular piece of entertainment on Earth."

Kuma27d ago

If GTA 6 abandons everything that made GTA 5 great, it will crash and burn right out of the gate. GTA 5 was funny and not at all PC. My worry is that they will cave to the PC crowd and ruin the vibes.

Eonjay27d ago

They got freaking BBLs twerking on the top of trucks for the gram, the freaking Flordia joker, and dude running down the stree in their undies and you are worried about it being 'too PC'? The internet has runied gamers. It doesn't matter how non-PC they make the game, you will all listen to the grifters telling you not to believe your lying eyes lol.

gigoran827d ago

"Rockstar Games’ co-founder and former VP of Development Jamie King said he envisions GTA 6 as a game that’s “maybe not quite as edgy or quite as funny” as its satirical predecessors."

oh yeah, totally internet grifters spreading rumors...

blacktiger27d ago

That's part of the plan, they destroyed you but they need to destroy the shareholders? Only 1 shre holder is the true elite that don't care

1nsomniac27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

Meh.., if it’s above £55 I ain’t buying it.

Rockstar are genuinely not half the company they used to be. I was a die hard GTA fan I’ve purchased every game and expansion and spin off day 1.

My opinion of GTA6 is that I can take it or leave it. Not bothered. They burnt too many bridges.

DaReapa27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

So they're actually leaving the door open for an L.A. Noire sequel? Nice!

VaNdAl27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

He should just come out and say it already it's getting stupid it's going to be a 100 bucks $200 for the special edition🤡🤡; 29315;🤣♿

Storm2327d ago

I won't be getting this game until I can get it for $70. SHoot, I could wait for it to be even lower. I don't need the game that badly as my backlog is still huge and I am enjoying playing other things.

Show all comments (13)
40°

Talking Aliens: The Video Games With Author Mike Diver

Skewed and Reviewed have posted an interview with Author Mike Diver about his pending book on Aliens video games.

70°

Xbox boss: Memory crisis could impact next-gen hardware pricing

Xbox boss Asha Sharma has discussed how component shortages will impact the company's plans for Project Helix.

Read Full Story >>
gamedeveloper.com
Eonjay28d ago

When does this end? Its killing everyone. Consoles and PC. And for what? AI? The benefits of AI are completely outweighed by the negatives. And the government should have never allowed one company to buy up all the RAM.

Lexreborn229d ago

This kind of proves this is an after thought product, most products like this are in r&d 5 years before they start mass producing. So they typically have the cost of components and things worked out long before assembly starts.

This is an assumption still, but I wouldn’t be surprised if project helix is similar to Scalebound,perfect dark and sod3. They had an idea but no actual execution other than concept stage. Being impacted by the ram shortage likely would also put this device 3-4 years out.

I’m not even sure MS has that endurance with Xbox yet

Fishy Fingers29d ago (Edited 29d ago )

I mean.... what?

We're at a point that Samsung wont even provide their own phone department ram because they can sell it at higher prices to 3rd parties (AI). Its more profitable to sell the ram than make their own devices with it.

You think because R&D starts 5 years ago the 3rd party component manufacturers will honour that price? They'll sell it to whomever is paying the most today, not some gentlemens agreement they made years ago. AI farms will buy more volume at higher prices than any console manufacturer will. It'll be the same for Playstation.

Lexreborn228d ago

Contractual agreements are not the same as “gentlemen” agreements. If you think that they work with their distributors a month before production then their entire business model is trash. They work with companies like nvidia constantly for building the graphics cards they need. They work with companies that build motherboards years in advance. This is what proper business planning does.

They are not buying components on a whim like a consumer. So again, considering the ram isn’t a singular module and is integrated into the motherboard I highly doubt they wouldn’t have a final schematic that they are supposed to be building around.

If they are delaying production another 3 years then it’s obvious again this is an after though project and is just trying to be responsive to their bad execution they had the last 14 years.

It also isn’t far fetched to use their failure to produce first party titles the last 7 years including the highly anticipated games I mentioned all being cancelled. That they would continue to you know… lie

Sitdown29d ago

You don't really know how this works huh?

Profchaos29d ago (Edited 29d ago )

Helix is going to be stupidly expensive

Instead of leaning into smarter upscaling techniques they're brute forcing hardware that will cost them dearly and it remains to be seen if it's genuinely going to provide a meaningful differential

I know in the oc.doace people like to brag about not using frame gen or dlss to get to high on a game but for the majority of players they happily use those technologies without a second thought

That's going to be ps6 vs Helix

Eonjay28d ago

Yeah with FSR 5 they should be able to offer a much cheaper version of Helix.

Eonjay28d ago

While this does seem to be the case, I am encouraged by the statement from Microsoft about wanting to provide affordable options. If this means a Series S style Helix, at least there will be something affordable being offered.

XBManiac28d ago

Series S is what has killed Xbox Series so... Will they dare?

blacktiger29d ago

It's called systematic inflationary. Yes we get it Microsoft, keep raising in the name ofall kinds of stuffs

pwnmaster300029d ago

Honestly if there was thing I learned from this generation is that new consoles arnt day one anymore.
I can wait 1-3 years.

DarXyde29d ago

Another important lesson from this generation: while Nintendo showed us that prices don't necessarily need to ever drop, we've now learned that waiting 1-3 years does carry some risk that prices increase. This generation is just bizarre in all the wrong ways.

LucasRuinedChildhood29d ago (Edited 29d ago )

The factors are largely external. Covid and Russia-Ukraine war causing inflation led to the first price increase in 2022.

Then we get Trump's tariffs increasing hardware prices, AI boom causing a RAM crisis, war on Iran causing a worldwide fuel crisis which impacts the cost of everything.

Gaming doesn't exist in a vacuum. The last few years have been a shitshow and lot of it was definitely avoidable.

DarXyde28d ago

LucasRuinedChildhood,

For sure. No disagreement on the external factors doing a lot of this. Where I have to gently push back however is on two fronts:

1. The pandemic definitely caused some issues: asynchronous development was a big issue and really complicated timelines and affected game quality. At the same time, when it comes to price hikes, it's really difficult to know what was genuine necessity and what was taking consumers for a ride. The pandemic brought about "stag-flation" which was increasing prices and stagnant wages, which was a problem caused by supply chain constraints. There was also "Greed-flation", where companies that were slightly affected or had no issues took advantage of the situation and squeezed everyone citing supply chain issues when there were none.

2. It's definitely true that the tariffs, AI boom, and RAM crisis were all things enabled by tech broligarchs throwing money at this caricature of a world leader, one of them being Satya Nadella. I don't think Sony and Nintendo have contributed much to this problem if at all, but Microsoft's Nadella I feel was instrumental in causing every one of those issues. Microsoft as a company contributed to both candidates (though they gave Harris 4x as much if I recall), but Nadella was all in on letting AI run wild. He paid for unregulated AI, and got a war that's not a war (even though Trump called it that at least five times on television) that screwed up helium access. So for me, I feel that one of the players in the gaming industry is a key architect of these issues, and for that reason I struggle a bit to think of it as "external".

Show all comments (28)