Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
GameCube (Games) Entertainment Games

Next Nintendo Console In Spring 2005? 74

Posted by simoniker from the no-time-like-the-present dept.
Thanks to an anonymous reader for pointing to an IGN story claiming that the Gamecube's successor will launch as early as Spring 2005. This date, sourced from anonymous development houses, seems earlier than expected, and IGN mentions that "..asked if they had received any official documentation for the machine, all software houses contacted said no." But equally, any console getting a head start on the next generation will have a significant advantage, and as IGN suggest, "Nintendo has repeatedly stated that it would not be the last hardware manufacturer out of the gates with its next console."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Next Nintendo Console In Spring 2005? More

Next Nintendo Console In Spring 2005?

Comments Filter:
  • I'm really curious to see if this strategy is going to pay off for Nintendo.

    I'm sorry to say that Nintendo is falling behind not because they were last out of the gate, but because (no matter what software they distribute) they will always have the sickly-sweet stigma associated with their product.

    more power to them though, I've always thought Nintendo has created an excellent product, and competition is good for everyone.

    Mike

    • Re:the first horse out is not always the winner. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Synic ( 14430 ) on Tuesday June 03, 2003 @02:57AM (#6103554) Homepage Journal
      Nintendo has always been anal retentive about how they allow third parties to make software for their consoles. They usually come with much higher royalty costs, which is because their non-standard format choices for the media allows them to charge whatever they wish. Console companies need to wake up and get with the program.

      The formula for success is as follows:
      1) Set the bar to entry for releasing games with the official logo low enough to make a small-to-decent profit on each title.
      2) Allow anyone to be an official developer, if they can afford the purchasing of the official developmental hardware units.
      3) Allow anyone to be an unofficial developer using a home-development kit similar to the "Yaroze" program.
      4) Offer several different approaches to coding for the platform. Similar to Katana vs Windows CE approach for Dreamcast.

      Between all these things you will get a ton of developer mindshare and just about anyone with the cash to spend on the hardware development units can at least try to make games for it. If they have something worthy of selling in stores, then the low barrier to entry should allow most (as in, even smaller) publishers to profit on titles (and therefore be interested in funding development).
      • That's part of one formula for success. Yes, Sony's embrace of 3rd party developers helped pave the way for their PS1 success. But Nintendo set the bar high for developers for a reason. In the early '80's, a glut of shitty games for the Atari 2600 killed the video game industry. When Nintendo started shopping the NES to retailers in 1984, no one wanted to touch video games. Toy stores told Nintendo that video games were poison, and they would never sell. Nintendo single handedly revived the industry in part
        • On Atari: Point taken. Atari 2600 predates my own gaming experience a little so I didn't think of it.
    • I am really excited to see if this will help benefit Nintendo as well. Competition has set them back, maybe this will bring them back up.

  • First one out? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by glenkim ( 412499 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @11:15PM (#6102665) Homepage
    This strategy didn't necessarily work for Sega with the Dreamcast. It came out first, and had the edge over the PS2 in certain aspects, yet it still lost.
    • Perhaps too early is a bad thing? PS2 definately has the edge on the current market because of its early release. But at the same time I see where you are coming from with the Dreamcast comment. Perhaps what Nintendo really needs is to come out early while being as developer friendly as possible. I'm sure that Nintendo could win a lot of friends if they were more friendly than Microsoft who is undoubtedly aggressive and unccooperative with its licensing agreements.

      • Re:First one out? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Jerf ( 17166 ) on Monday June 02, 2003 @11:47PM (#6102814) Journal
        I was going to make a snarky Dreamcast comment too but I got beaten to it at least twice. ;-) On the other hand it looks like I can be the first to say...

        Perhaps what Nintendo really needs is to come out early while being as developer friendly as possible. ... that that didn't work for the Dreamcast either. The DC was (and is [dcemulation.com]) developer friendly, esp. compared to the whacked-out architecture of the PS2, and, well, it still didn't win.

        On a related note, I'll be intrigued to see how much more power Nintendo gets out of the unit vs. the current Gamecube. Something a lot of fanboys don't understand is that improvement in real graphics quality and CPU performance aren't anything like linear (FPS and pixels/second are somewhat closer to linear). Once you get to Dreamcast/PS2/Gamecube levels, and you get artists who know what they are doing, you need a lot more power to improve the actual quality of the picture. That's why, if you're willing to be honest about it, a latest-generation PS2 game may only look 40-50% better then a last-generation DC game, rather then the 300-400% you might be led to believe from the raw processing power difference.

        There's a danger that by coming out so soon, the last-generation GameCube games and the first games out of the new Nintendo machine might not look as different as Nintendo might like, whereas PS2 was an instant winner over the old PS due to the time span. (The new hardware would of course look better in the last generation, but it has to have people buying it to get that far.)

        I'd say this is a desparation move, and they really need to make sure they bring developers up to speed as quickly as possible, and make the first few games stunners.

        That wasn't enough for the Dreamcast either [ign.com], but hey, the alternative is certain failure.

        • Re:First one out? (Score:3, Interesting)

          by morcheeba ( 260908 )
          I'll just second that "DC is dev friendly" comment. I was developing for the DC's VMU (a memory card with a screen, buttons, and 8-bit processor), and the head of developer sw support in the US contacted me (and others) to offer support. They set up a mailing list and got us answers (and sega demonstration code) quickly! They were working on getting us the full-blown dev kit, but said they were encumbered by 3rd-party IP it contained -- still, we got everything we needed to develop with, and some people cam
        • Piss poor texture art can make any hardware's game titles look like crap. Look at how low-poly the models are for the upcoming World of Warcraft game, and how nice they look despite the fact. Good texture artists make a world of difference, as well as good low-poly modeling, and I certainly hope people will figure this out eventually. Now look at Shadowbane for an example of crappy texturing.

      • Re:First one out? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by zudo ( 307075 )
        PS2 definately has the edge on the current market because of its early release.

        Is it really true that ps2 has the edge because of its early release? I think a major contributor to ps2's success (with both publishers and consumers - which obviously feed each other) has been reputation. Sony built a huge brand with playstation and people bought into that when the new machine came out. Think back to the dreamcast launch, no one was interested in it because they trusted Sony to blow Sega out of the water w
      • Perhaps what Nintendo really needs is to come out early while being as developer friendly as possible.

        They don't even need to do that. They just have to be friendly with a few large development shops (EA would definately increase Nintendo's marketshare) They need some good sports titles and they need to shake that "cartonny" (is that a word?) image. Sure they can continue to provide the Mario, Link and Metroid series, but I beleive some good EA titles, coupled with a cheaper price would help nintendo o
    • Dreamcast lost because Stolar was an idiot. Go read fatbabies.com if you want insight into how Sega of America was mismanaged into death. One example: they turned down wrestling licenses like WCW, WWF, because they thought "nobody was interested in that kind of thing" (hahah).

    • Re:First one out? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by burns210 ( 572621 )
      "This strategy didn't necessarily work for Sega with the Dreamcast. It came out first, and had the edge over the PS2 in certain aspects, yet it still lost."

      The problem was that the dreamcast was release so early, that it was premature, and nearly half a generation early. Nintendo will likely release days or a few weeks ahead of their competition, not several months.

  • Difficult times for them... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    any console getting a head start on the next generation will have a significant advantage

    That did not help the Dreamcast. Look where Sega is now. Sony is going to have to make a mistake for the lead to be taken from them - like being very very late to the market with an underpowered machine.

    The upcoming PSX reeks of bad planning - people want the PS3 *now* (not some stupid multimedia machine) and they're diluting the Playstation brand with it.
    • I agree with this too... I really wanted to buy a PS2 when I was console shopping but the old technology (in comparison to GCN and XBOX) was a major turn-off, especially since GCN and XBOX can be aquired for much cheaper than the PS2. I think a new overpriced PS2 is NOT going to boost sales for Sony, and they really do need to push out the next gen if GCN and XBOX2 are just around the corner.
      • I really wanted to buy a PS2 when I was console shopping but the old technology (in comparison to GCN and XBOX) was a major turn-off, especially since GCN and XBOX can be aquired for much cheaper than the PS2.

        Can I have some of that crack? I don't think there was 1 factual statement in that sentence, except that the Cube is cheaper than PS/2 (PS/2 costs the same as XBox).

        The technology is different, but not significantly "older" if you can even compare them that way.
        • when I was shoping you could get a GCN with Mario Sunshine and mem card for $175, an Xbox with 1 controller and game for about $200 or a PS2 with no games for around $215. The market does change, but this is how it was when I purchased my console. As far as graphics go, if you think PS2 looks anywhere near as good as Gamecube and XBox you are smoking crack. PS2 has great games but the system is old technology.
          • Whatever system has the games I want to play, that's the one I'd get. I think anyone that's owned a console system before would go with this line of thinking.
          • when I was shoping you could get a GCN with Mario Sunshine and mem card for $175, an Xbox with 1 controller and game for about $200 or a PS2 with no games for around $215. The market does change, but this is how it was when I purchased my console.

            I don't know what market you're in, but in the US the XBox and PS2 have been at the same price point (for the console alone) since the release of the XBox.

            As far as graphics go, if you think PS2 looks anywhere near as good as Gamecube and XBox you are smoking
            • Even Nintendo admitted on launch of the GameCube that their console was the least advanced of the systems

              No they didn't. They (basically) said that they favored manufacturing efficiency and cost over bleeding-edge performance. Never *once* did they claim that they had the 'slowest' system.

              If you read the technical specs on the systems, Nintendo cites lower numbers than Sony or Microsoft -- that's because MS and Sony publish theoretical maximum performance and Nintendo publishes typical in-game perfor
              • Actually, I'll have to retract that statement because, not only can I not find the statement, but I believe that it was a comment I read based on their release pricing (in other words, someone commented that they had basically admitted as much by pricing so much lower than the other consoles (~$100 originally)).

                If you read the technical specs on the systems, Nintendo cites lower numbers than Sony or Microsoft -- that's because MS and Sony publish theoretical maximum performance and Nintendo publishes typ
      • I agree with this too... I really wanted to buy a PS2 when I was console shopping but the old technology (in comparison to GCN and XBOX) was a major turn-off, especially since GCN and XBOX can be aquired for much cheaper than the PS2.

        And did you ever consider buying the console that had the games you wanted?

        You're talking about price and old technology, but you're not talking about games.

  • I just hope (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Masami Eiri ( 617825 ) <brain.wavNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Monday June 02, 2003 @11:31PM (#6102748) Journal
    I just hope that now that Nintendo's gone disc, they'll follow Sony's example and make this new one backwards compadible.

    That, IMO, is one of the main reasons that PS2 won out over the Dreamcast.

    • I hope so too, but backwards cambatability isn't always the easiest thing todo. Especially if they change the main hardware significantly. If they do that, it will have to rely on emulation, which would greatly increase the power needed.

      IIRC PS2 got around this by using the PS1 cpu as its sound processor.

      • In a word: (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Ayanami Rei ( 621112 ) <rayanami&gmail,com> on Tuesday June 03, 2003 @12:05AM (#6102886) Journal
        PPC970 (or a derivative)

        I don't think there should be a problem (cackles evilly)
      • IIRC PS2 got around this by using the PS1 cpu as its sound processor.

        Actually, it's the I/O processor that acts as the PS1 system in the PS2. The processor was developed with another company (at least for the initial runs of the PS2), so it's not quite the original PS1 CPU (though it's probably the same chip used in the newer PSOne consoles).

        From what I've read, Sony's gotten most of the functionality of the PS2 down to 3 or 4 chips (the PS1/I/O chip, the sound processor, and the original dual-chip layou

    • Re:I just hope (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Synic ( 14430 )
      No, format wasn't the reason at all that Dreamcast failed. It had to do with the fact that Stolar was the most abrasive person you'd ever met, so he'd piss off every prospective client, and that he couldn't recognize a good opportunity if it hit him in the face. If you pay attention, a lot of the good titles for the system came from Japan. For a console to succeed in the United States, you need the American juggernaught EA to publish it's sports games for it. Frankly I find this sad, but whatever. In Japan

      • Re:I just hope (Score:2, Interesting)

        by PainKilleR-CE ( 597083 )
        For a console to succeed in the United States, you need the American juggernaught EA to publish it's sports games for it. Frankly I find this sad, but whatever. In Japan you need RPG games to succeed (that would mean Square or Enix). Not only do you need one or two titles of these genres from first party or such, you need VARIETY. Sony will continue to dominate as long as they release the most software (despite the fact that most of it is garbage).

        Actually, the console was doing ok in the US. It was the f


    • I just hope that now that Nintendo's gone disc, they'll follow Sony's example and make this new one backwards compadible.

      That, IMO, is one of the main reasons that PS2 won out over the Dreamcast.

      Well, first of all, there's an unfair comparision because there was no point in providing backward compatibility with Dreamcast. What could you possibly make Dreamcast backward compatible with? Saturn? (Software libabry too small, most of its best games like NiGHTS or Panzer Dragon do not appeal to the general ma
      • Well, first of all, there's an unfair comparision because there was no point in providing backward compatibility with Dreamcast. What could you possibly make Dreamcast backward compatible with?

        Sega had planned on having software available for the dreamcast to run PS1 games (Bleem I believe it was). The way it would've been offered seemed like a waste of time to me, though, and it really only strengthened the Sony market.

        The reason backward compatiblity is beneficial to PS2 is that the original Playstati

  • well well well! (Score:2, Funny)

    by bmnc ( 643126 )
    Nintendo wont be the last one out the gate to their next console and M$ have already stated that they will beat Sony to the next gen... I guess Sony has drawn the short straw this time. Bad luck Sony, maybe next time you'll "bags" not being last sooner!
    • Sony seem to be trying the same strategy that worked last time.

      Leave the current console on the shelves long enough to get insane levels of market penetration.

      Hype up the capabilities of the coming real soon now next console in a way that geeks find ridiculous, but makes more normal gamers salivate.
  • LAN Party >>>> multiplayer console
    • I hate to break it to you, but there are such things as console LAN parties now (see Xbox/Halo).

      I would agree that each person having their own monitor is nice, but sometimes I'd rather be alone in my house playing online or sometimes I'd rather just have the ability to play multiplayer without needing extra hardware units. That way if I'm the only person "on the block" with the new leet console then I can haul it to whoever is providing the food and beverages. ;)
  • They are running out of dimentions!!!

    1. GameLine --NES
    2. GameSquare --N64
    3. GameCube --duh
    4. GameTime
    5. GameProballity
    6. ........ /ol

  • Failed console history (Score:5, Interesting)

    by neostorm ( 462848 ) on Tuesday June 03, 2003 @01:56AM (#6103366)
    It all comes down to public bias in the end. Of course I have no proof to back this up other than strict observation, but I think one can agree from a similar perspective.

    Sega started getting a bad wrap with the 32x. Similarly poor decisions on future systems (SegaCD, Saturn, etc.) caused a lot of the gaming public to lose faith. I was working in a game retail outlet when the Dreamcast was finally released, way ahead of everyone else and with a great library of launch titles. When confronted with the news of a new Sega machine, no matter how amazing, the majority of the consumers generally replied with distaste, usually making remarks about the failed (US)Saturn and other past Sega hardware.

    Likewise, the N64 could have marked the begining of the end for Nintendo's set top consoles. With a poor library of games and the beginning of horrid developer relations, many lost faith with the big N for their lack of judgment. Now, despite the few beneficial qualities of the GC (great first party titles, excelent hardware engineering, etc.), I hear many people making statemets about Nintendo that are very similar to the gripes that most held with Sega prior to the fall of the DC.

    So while Nintendos poor decisions add to their woes, it only seems to take one slip up and public bias will take a company to it's grave. This is interestingly something specific to the game industry due to the entrenched fan-base, but that's a whole other topic.
    • The first party titles is what probably will keep Nintendo going... Zelda, Metroid, Mario and yes, even Pokemon all have thier following, who buy the system for that, and branch out a bit.

      Heck, I haven't bought a consol since the PS1 and right now i'm truely considering picking up the GC, mainly for the Zelda game.

      Now, to find some good RPG's for it as well...
      • Get Skies of Arcadia on the GC. I can honestly say that Skies of Arcadia is one of the best adventures I've ever had since I was a kid, though I played it on the Dreamcast first. If you haven't checked that out I actually recommend it over Zelda:WW. Despite the fact that Zelda stands on it's own as a fantastic title any how.
        • feh. You should have played Grandia II on DC. Skies of Arcadia's combat system is god awful in comparison. That and Skies of Arcadia you can't run away from enemies and you encounter them at horrificially annoying rates.
          • You could run from enemies in Skies of Arcadia. It just hurt your ranking (you gain ranks based on certain choices you make). The problem was with the DC version, the load times were so long that it took less time to just kill the monsters than to run away. The Gamecube has much speedier load times.

            They also fixed things slightly on the atrocious amount of monster encounters for the GC version (though there are still a /lot/ of monsters). The encounters have been lessened and the experience handed out
          • Oh I completely understand where you're coming from. I played all the RPGs the DC had to offer, but Skies hit the spot like no other. I HATED the random encounters, (and yes, Grandia 2 was a dream come true for battle systems) but the rest of the game was so good I was able to overlook that aspect (albeit painfully). The reason I only mentioned Skies in reply to the parent post is because it was the best RPG that was ported to the Gamecube.
        • Thanks for the tip, I'll look around for it...

          Main reason I intend to get zelda is because the fact that it's one of the bundles avlaiable... While I like Metroid and Mario, I've had more fun playing Zelda games.
    • Rather than problems with the technology, I think Sega shot themselves in the foot trying to stay ahead of the competition with too many incremental changes - Mega drive, Mega CD, 32X, Neptune, before getting to Saturn. Joe Consumer wants to spend his cash on a console that's going to be around for a few years. If it's likely that the current machine is going to be replaced by a new model at the end of the year, it might be best to wait for that one. Or buy a PlayStation or Nintendo, which is pretty much wh
      • Joe Consumer wants to spend his cash on a console that's going to be around for a few years. If it's likely that the current machine is going to be replaced by a new model at the end of the year, it might be best to wait for that one. I think that Sony took care of this problem with the addition of Backward Compatibility in PS2, I sure hope that Nintendo is smart enough to follow suit if they are planning on releasing a new console so soon after GameCube's slow start!
    • Sega did die a slow death since the 32x/Saturn period. Nintendo made many similar bad decisions with the N64, however, Nintendo is doing just about all the right things with GameCube: low price, developer friendly, etc.

      It takes years for any given console to gain critical mass, and probably even longer for a video game company to recover from its mistakes and regain the top spot. It's obvious that Nintendo will never win over Sony in this generation, but that's besides the point. GameCube is a good platfor
      • Why do you say their E3 presentation was lousy? I think i spent more time in their booth than any other. Mario Kart was great, F-Zero was pretty good, FF: Crystal Quest was intriguing, although i'd have liked to have seen the single player mode. Lots of cool stuff as far as i could tell.
    • Likewise, the N64 could have marked the begining of the end for Nintendo's set top consoles. With a poor library of games and the beginning of horrid developer relations, many lost faith with the big N for their lack of judgment. Now, despite the few beneficial qualities of the GC (great first party titles, excelent hardware engineering, etc.), I hear many people making statemets about Nintendo that are very similar to the gripes that most held with Sega prior to the fall of the DC.

      This one is wise in the
  • Since Nintendo _finally_ abandoned "the cartridge", can we dream of having all our $50 GameCube titles playable on the new machine? If the new machine reads either DVD (probable) or "Pocket DVD" (as it currently does) there really shouldn't be an issue with backwards compatibility unless the new machine is very, very radically different. By 2005 their machine should be capable of strict "emulation" of the GameCube, anyway.
  • I'll keep it short and simple.

    Consoles are becoming increasingly expensive.
    To combat this, companies need to do 2 things:
    1) Lose money on systems to increase market penetration.
    2) Target audiences who have sufficient disposable income.

    As we all know, teens have lots of disposable income (look at all those clothes they buy, and how many times they go to the movies!). Sony and MS went after these target groups very aggressively with sports and action titles that would appeal to teens (Madden Football, Halo
  • At this point, the only way that Nintendo is going to survive in the console business is to try to make their next gameboy a portable gamecube and skip N64-level technology. People are losing faith in the gamecube and it seems like only Nintendo is making money on exclusive gamecube titles. There would be so much added value to the gamecube if gamers knew that the games they buy now will also be playable on the next gameboy in a couple of years.

Slashdot Top Deals

2.4 statute miles of surgical tubing at Yale U. = 1 I.V.League

Close