Game Informer: Multiple Sources confirm new HD console at E3 for Nintendo

^^ Yeah, I would have dumped my launch Wii when GS had that trade-in promo a few weeks back but since all my virtual console games are tied to it I have to hold on to the thing. But maybe that's all part of their evil plan ;).

[quote name='foltzie']I agree, depending on how you read your post. I think 8GB is fine if one can expand, easily.

I would wager most folks will never see a 8GB limit, but the top ~5% will find such limit soon into the consoles lifespan.[/QUOTE]

This was exactly my point. 8GB will be fine for most people (and nearly all "casuals"). As long as expandability is easy and cheap (use of standard SD cards should cover both of those points) then the rest of us should be OK too.
 
Well, I want it to have a lot more then 8 GB of built-in storage. I suppose if it supports high capacity and high speed SDHC (or whatever) cards, and they have the ability to run games directly from SDHC (not the wonky setup they use in the Wii), that could work, but I have a feeling that will cost me more more then had they just included a lot more storage inside from the start. Plus it seems likely that Nintendo will gimp downloads if their system ships with a paltry amount of internal storage. Plus I just don't want another system that has the download service as an afterthought again. It's a big part of what I like about my Xbox.
 
Well, I don't think there's any argument here from me or anyone else that we all wouldn't like more than 8GB out of the box. I'm just trying to get at why they would do this. I'd have been more comfortable with 64GB out of the box and SDHC expansion (with no limitation - meaning it is just an extension of the internal memory). We'll see how it plays out.
 
[quote name='io']
This was exactly my point. 8GB will be fine for most people (and nearly all "casuals"). As long as expandability is easy and cheap (use of standard SD cards should cover both of those points) then the rest of us should be OK too.[/QUOTE]

Indeed, a 32GB SD card is $50 on Amazon right now .

Compared to an average 2.5 in HDD, that is still 10-15 times more expensive, but that ratio tends to narrow more and more with time, and it has the benefit of not having any moving parts.

Now, this comparison would have been folly even a few years ago, and now it is still rich on a per GB perspective, but it looks surprisingly viable.
 
But the question is will small devs be willing to put big downloads on WiiHDWare if there is that knowledge of a lack of space? Then you have to ask if they'll work just like the Wii does right now. Not giving developers the assurance that the memory is and always will be there will make it tougher for them to bring downloadable games to their service.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']But the question is will small devs be willing to put big downloads on WiiHDWare if there is that knowledge of a lack of space? Then you have to ask if they'll work just like the Wii does right now. Not giving developers the assurance that the memory is and always will be there will make it tougher for them to bring downloadable games to their service.[/QUOTE]

I dont think the theoretical size limit is the largest concern, but it would rather be what is the size limit for "WiiHDWare" games. Xbox Live's limit is a stated 350MB, which would be at least 22 games under the rumored 8GB. Adjust accordingly (some games are larger).
 
[quote name='KingBroly']XBLA's limit is 2gb actually.[/QUOTE]

Ahh yes, the "technical limit" for XBL Arcade games. I dont quite understand that one since I think some full game DLs are in the 4GB range.

It seems a bit Drake-ish, but I still think 8GB leaves decent headroom for your average user.
 
Wow high definition? What's next, a built in DVD player? Newsflash Nintendo, HD and built in hard drives are not "features" any more they are standards and expectations for all systems.
 
The XBLA limit is 2gb. The Games on Demand limit is 7gb (I say this because there are no multiple disc games on the service). Map Pack DLC ranges anywhere from 150mb to 500mb a piece. So no, 8gb isn't really that much.
 
[quote name='lionheart4life']Wow high definition? What's next, a built in DVD player? Newsflash Nintendo, HD and built in hard drives are not "features" any more they are standards and expectations for all systems.[/QUOTE]

Are Red Rings standard too?
 
[quote name='foltzie']Are Red Rings standard too?[/QUOTE]

HAHAHAHA....

don't forget the $500 price tag! they love the technology so much that when their favorite console hit the $500-$600 or when the online cost went up a few dollars, they all hollered foul. every 360 owner says it's fair to pay the service fee for their online feature and will always do that math magic for you to explain how cost effective it is. when prices went up, everyone went nuts over it. but when you show them the math magic, they say it wasn't justified, which became a few cents, for microsoft to move on. i can't wait for these people to pay $10-$20 a month for the online service and it will happen because microsoft is being crunched.

the headaches and the epileptic seizures are also standard.

btw, according to some, red rings are okay and they love it.
 
I'm not being a fanboy of any system here. I have all 3 of the current gen systems. And who the hell paid $500-600 for an xbox 360? Even though it was the cheapest, the Wii was still the biggest ripoff in the end. It literally does nothing. It is fun for the occasional party game, but extra controllers with nunchucks cost more than extras for the other 2 systems. And don't get me started on buying motion plus add-ons for your existing controllers. I think people should take a wait and see approach with the new Nintendo system. They will for sure put out a couple really good first party sequels but beyond that what can you be certain of?
 
[quote name='pochaccoheaven']HAHAHAHA....

don't forget the $500 price tag! they love the technology so much that when their favorite console hit the $500-$600 or when the online cost went up a few dollars, they all hollered foul. every 360 owner says it's fair to pay the service fee for their online feature and will always do that math magic for you to explain how cost effective it is. when prices went up, everyone went nuts over it. but when you show them the math magic, they say it wasn't justified, which became a few cents, for microsoft to move on. i can't wait for these people to pay $10-$20 a month for the online service and it will happen because microsoft is being crunched.

the headaches and the epileptic seizures are also standard.

btw, according to some, red rings are okay and they love it.[/QUOTE]

How old are you really, like about 12? Great stuff, keep it up.
 
Wow, this thread took a bad turn.

[quote name='foltzie']Are Red Rings standard too?[/QUOTE]

They did their part and fixed the problem. It's a thing of the past and irrelevant.

[quote name='pochaccoheaven']HAHAHAHA....

don't forget the $500 price tag! they love the technology so much that when their favorite console hit the $500-$600 or when the online cost went up a few dollars, they all hollered foul. every 360 owner says it's fair to pay the service fee for their online feature and will always do that math magic for you to explain how cost effective it is. when prices went up, everyone went nuts over it. but when you show them the math magic, they say it wasn't justified, which became a few cents, for microsoft to move on. i can't wait for these people to pay $10-$20 a month for the online service and it will happen because microsoft is being crunched.

the headaches and the epileptic seizures are also standard.

btw, according to some, red rings are okay and they love it.[/QUOTE]

Xbox 360 launch price was $299 - $399.

You can buy a 12 month membership on Amazon for $44. Divided by 12 = ~$3.66 a month. It's not that bad really. And of course it's fair for Microsoft to want to make money on services they provide. It's a company, their purpose is to make money.

[quote name='lionheart4life']I'm not being a fanboy of any system here. I have all 3 of the current gen systems. And who the hell paid $500-600 for an xbox 360? Even though it was the cheapest, the Wii was still the biggest ripoff in the end. It literally does nothing. It is fun for the occasional party game, but extra controllers with nunchucks cost more than extras for the other 2 systems. And don't get me started on buying motion plus add-ons for your existing controllers. I think people should take a wait and see approach with the new Nintendo system. They will for sure put out a couple really good first party sequels but beyond that what can you be certain of?[/QUOTE]

The Wii plays games. If you like the games that are on it, you'll enjoy it and it'll be worth it. Simple as that. Sure accessory costs add up, but this isn't exclusive to the Wii. Also, I can only think of 4 games off the top of my head that use motion plus. Two that I would possibly play (Zelda and Sports Resort).
 
[quote name='omster']Wow, this thread took a bad turn.



They did their part and fixed the problem. It's a thing of the past and irrelevant.
[/QUOTE]

It was funny in my head, but yeah, not adding anything of value. I prostrate myself before the interweb gods.
 
I'd rather focus on the game possibilities.

Metroid:
On-Screen: 2D HD Platformer, Touch Screen: First Person Shooter
 
[quote name='foltzie']It was funny in my head, but yeah, not adding anything of value. I prostrate myself before the interweb gods.[/QUOTE]

Ah, I was a bit thick and did not pick up the humor. I should've know better since I've seen your posts and they have been in good taste. Pardon my earlier post.

[quote name='Strell']This thread must be going 88 miles per hour because it's 2006 again.[/QUOTE]

History repeats itself sadly. Why 88 mph though?

[quote name='KingBroly']I'd rather focus on the game possibilities.

Metroid:
On-Screen: 2D HD Platformer, Touch Screen: First Person Shooter
[/QUOTE]

That's a interesting concept. I think it's better suited for the 3DS since the screens would be in closer proximity. I would guess it requires switching between both screens often.

I was thinking though, if the controller really does have a screen on it, the Wii 2 has essentially become a dual-screen home console system. Take how the DS's screens were used and apply it to a large system. The fact that it could just be used as a map is already a great addition in my mind.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']I'd rather focus on the game possibilities.

Metroid:
On-Screen: 2D HD Platformer, Touch Screen: First Person Shooter
[/QUOTE]

Give this man a cookie! This is the kind of thing I'm hoping for out of this system.

See, I don't want it to be a fucking clone of the PS3 and Xbox 360. I don't know why people want it to conform to that standard. If this nifty new controller means the hard drive has to go (in a cost effectiveness trade-off), then so be it. But see, I already have a 360 and a PS3, so, I really don't need another identical system with the same games.

Let's face it, even if Nintendo made it exactly like the 360/PS3 (say more like the PS3 with free online) would everyone here on CAG and the hardcore gamer crowd really flock to it anyway? I doubt it - they'd still stick with those other systems for the most part. So this system needs to stand out.

Personally, I'm thrilled that it isn't just the Wii with HD slapped on. It sounds like they are making a ton of changes that should appease you people and yet it has already failed in (many of) your eyes. I mean, most people seem to be overlooking that fact that they are, for the most part, abandoning waggle. I know it says it will use Wii remotes as well, but I'm not sure how that will work. If it isn't standard issue with each system (even if it uses the old Wii ones) then it won't get supported - and I'd think you guys would be happy with that ;).
 
I gotta say, I'm pretty disappointed with the Wii. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad I bought one, and it has a some great games. But unfortunately it's a really short list of great games. Outside of first party titles, theres very little for the system worth playing.

I really hope they do better on this new system. Personally, I'd love to see them get rid of motion controls entirely (not gonna happen, I know), but the controller images I've seen so far look good. The system NEEDS a more traditional controller as a standard feature if you want 3rd party developers to be interested in it.
 
[quote name='Waughoo']I gotta say, I'm pretty disappointed with the Wii. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad I bought one, and it has a some great games. But unfortunately it's a really short list of great games. Outside of first party titles, theres very little for the system worth playing.

I really hope they do better on this new system. Personally, I'd love to see them get rid of motion controls entirely (not gonna happen, I know), but the controller images I've seen so far look good. The system NEEDS a more traditional controller as a standard feature if you want 3rd party developers to be interested in it.[/QUOTE]

Completely disagree with all of this especially the lack of games comment.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']I'd rather focus on the game possibilities.

Metroid:
On-Screen: 2D HD Platformer, Touch Screen: First Person Shooter
[/QUOTE]

How would that work?
 
[quote name='Cerebral_One']How would that work?[/QUOTE]

Basically, take Other M's concept of switch to and from first person and make it a constant. Plus, you'd be able to move in first person. I guess you could have either perspective on either screen, too.

I honestly didn't really think about it that much. It just seems like a natural fit. Something that the entire game could be designed around.
 
Uhhhhh...I'm all for the having a 2D Metroid on this thing (or any system they feel like...though obviously it could be GORGEOUS on this new hardware). I'm even for another 3D game...I could take that, I guess...

I'm not sure about having both though.
 
Anyone who thinks the "screen" on the controller will be anything more than a crude, low-res touch screen, or something simple with motion control built in (at best) is fantasizing. High-res color LCD screens aren't cheap, and each controller would essentially have to have a graphics processor in it at least, to display content on the screen (unless it is a simple touch screen).

Coming back down to reality, Nintendo isn't going to put a lot of tech into the controller; would cost too much and leave them without a profit on the item (and you can bet they'll make a profit off of EVERY accessory they sell, just as they always have in the past; look at the prices of all the Wii accessories, they are very high for what the products actually cost to make).
 
I'm confused by it...I mean supposedly you can play games through it, so I'd expect a pretty high resolution, even if it's not a full 720p.

But having a screen in it will make the battery situation (which I assume it'll need) dicy. I do NOT WANT a proprietary battery, I want it using AAs again like the Xbox and Wii. If it uses a proprietary battery, and especially if it's sealed, that'll be the one thing that may stop me from buying it.
 
I wouldn't necessarily want it using AA's. I think it should come with a rechargeable battery pack, cord and battery included at no additional cost (like PS3). Sure you can recharge AA batteries and there are good quality ones out there but how many would it take to power a quality LCD screen and operate the controller wirelessly? If it takes 4 or more AA's that's going to make it kind of bulky especially it you need to use motion in games.
 
It probably would, but it's going to take a big proprietary battery too. And the PS3's situation is terrible-it's one reason I may standardize on the Xbox. Proprietary batteries suck, and sealed ones are even worse.
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']It probably would, but it's going to take a big proprietary battery too. And the PS3's situation is terrible-it's one reason I may standardize on the Xbox. Proprietary batteries suck, and sealed ones are even worse.[/QUOTE]

I don't mind the PS3 controllers. We have 4 and generally just keep 2 plugged in at all times and swap them around with the other two when we are done playing (of course, occasionally we use all 4 at once - I didn't buy the extra 2 just to have spares to swap ;)). Though I admit if you just had one controller it would be somewhat of a pain because whenever the system was on, you'd be using the controller and not be able to plug it in to charge. I'd think in that case you'd need a separate charger or something.

But I'm guessing this controller would be like a mini DS of sorts. And thinking in those terms I'm sure it will have a built-in battery and charge much like the DS (or perhaps the 3DS which would be better - a docking station you just sit it on when not playing). I'm expecting a DS-quality screen. They already have the tech for that. Given how much they sell DS Lites for (and still profit on them), and the fact that this would only have 1 screen and not 2, I'm sure they can come up with a controller with some decent processing power for $70 or so, which wouldn't be unreasonable.

There's no way it is an HD screen - don't know why anyone would think that. Didn't they say the TV screen could could be split in 4 and sent to different controllers? I'm not sure how that would work (and would require people to have 4 controllers which is dicey) but it sort of implies DS-level resolution, or at most something equivalent to SD - not HD...
 
[quote name='catabarez']A little movie called Back to the Future :)[/QUOTE]

It's just sad that you had to answer that question. :cry:
 
I think the screen on a controller thing is interesting, but I'm not sure it's that useful. When I'm playing a console game I never look at the controller. Does anyone? Having to look at the controller doesn't really seem like an improvement. As far as maps, I think I'd rather be able to pop a map up on screen and hide it again. Looking down at the controller doesn't really seem any more convenient. Indeed it sounds awkward. I'm sure they'll come up with some way to use it, but the ability to plug a GBA into a Gamecube didn't exactly result in a plethora of great ideas. I guess they could put Four Swords into the new Virtual Console. I suppose that was limited by most people not having the hardware, though.
 
I'm starting to get pretty pumped for E3, I just hope it doesn't turn out to be just a Wii HD. I want something new and fresh, a big leap forward not just a minor upgrade. But it is Nintendo so I am preparing myself for disappointment.
 
[quote name='Corvin']It's just sad that you had to answer that question. :cry:[/QUOTE]
I was as shocked as you. I mean I'm only 18 and I feel old now that someone does not understand the reference.
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']It probably would, but it's going to take a big proprietary battery too. And the PS3's situation is terrible-it's one reason I may standardize on the Xbox. Proprietary batteries suck, and sealed ones are even worse.[/QUOTE]

It could be like the 3DS where they sell spare batteries. Plus I would love to see a charging cradle. Rechargeable battles have actually become more of a hassle for me since I can't start/stop when they charge, I just have to leave them charging until they are done and I can't use the controller while it's charging (unless I use other batteries which defeat the purpose).
 
[quote name='KingBroly']Basically, take Other M's concept of switch to and from first person and make it a constant. Plus, you'd be able to move in first person. I guess you could have either perspective on either screen, too.

I honestly didn't really think about it that much. It just seems like a natural fit. Something that the entire game could be designed around.[/QUOTE]

I haven't played Other M but I can't see how playing 2d on one screen and 3d on the other simultaneously would be an enjoyable experience. No offense.
 
[quote name='Sir_Fragalot']It could be like the 3DS where they sell spare batteries. .[/QUOTE]

That's better than having them sealed, but still sucks. None of Nintendo's handhelds with rechargeables even work without the battery. I'm not sure I should have invested in any Nintendo portables since the GBC because of that, and ditto for this new system.

[quote name='cgarb84']I'm starting to get pretty pumped for E3, I just hope it doesn't turn out to be just a Wii HD. I want something new and fresh, a big leap forward not just a minor upgrade. But it is Nintendo so I am preparing myself for disappointment.[/QUOTE]

The rumors point to it being on par with or better than the current gen systems.

[quote name='crunchewy']I think the screen on a controller thing is interesting, but I'm not sure it's that useful. When I'm playing a console game I never look at the controller. Does anyone? Having to look at the controller doesn't really seem like an improvement. As far as maps, I think I'd rather be able to pop a map up on screen and hide it again. Looking down at the controller doesn't really seem any more convenient. Indeed it sounds awkward. [/QUOTE]

The idea sounded cool 10 years ago...but after multiple versions of it, I've found it just isn't, as per above. It's sounding like yet another terrible Nintendo gimmick, which in this case may mean the system has no longevity at all, like I guess their handhelds :whistle2:/

[quote name='io']But I'm guessing this controller would be like a mini DS of sorts. And thinking in those terms I'm sure it will have a built-in battery and charge much like the DS (or perhaps the 3DS which would be better - a docking station you just sit it on when not playing). I'm expecting a DS-quality screen. They already have the tech for that. Given how much they sell DS Lites for (and still profit on them), and the fact that this would only have 1 screen and not 2, I'm sure they can come up with a controller with some decent processing power for $70 or so, which wouldn't be unreasonable.[/quote]

Well, it's supposedly six inches, and supposedly you can play games on it, so I think it would have to be at least 480p.
 
[quote name='Cerebral_One']I haven't played Other M but I can't see how playing 2d on one screen and 3d on the other simultaneously would be an enjoyable experience. No offense.[/QUOTE]

Well I can't exactly see it in motion. It's an idea, it's what people do. Some work, some don't.
 
I think it's a good idea, Broly. It'd work in a multiplayer mecha game; you could give commands to teammates by pointing out enemies using the controller as a touchscreen, marking out the map and trying to issue commands as needed.

Multiplayer FPS could assign different abilities to players, reflected by the screen. Maybe the demolitions guy uses it to set the charges, or someone is in a commander mode and issuing directives.

Nintendo has a history of saying EXACTLY what they are planning on doing with upcoming stuff, but making it sound innocuous at the time. I need to find the exact quote (really I need a transcript), but Iwata made strange comments back at GDC concerning the exact idea of multiple screens, as I mentioned below in that thread:

[quote name='Strell']Possible allusions to game interfaces utilizing multiple screens (i.e., conjunction between TVs)[/QUOTE]

I'm thinking this is going to be the deal, marrying some DS like ideas with a home console. Predict this now, hate later. Guess we'll find out in a few weeks.
 
[quote name='catabarez']I was as shocked as you. I mean I'm only 18 and I feel old now that someone does not understand the reference.[/QUOTE]

Heh - well, I saw the original movie in the theater at release and I didn't get the reference. I only saw it once back then and never again - so it was hardly fresh in my mind ;).

[quote name='Strell']And how![/QUOTE]

Troll ;).
 
What I mean is I don't know how well the idea would work either. It's something that until I see it in motion I can't determine if it'd work or not.
 
[quote name='catabarez']I was as shocked as you. I mean I'm only 18 and I feel old now that someone does not understand the reference.[/QUOTE]

No need to feel old. I'm older. I've heard of the movies plenty, just never had the interest to watch.

[quote name='KingBroly']What I mean is I don't know how well the idea would work either. It's something that until I see it in motion I can't determine if it'd work or not.[/QUOTE]

Ever so true.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Strell']I think it's a good idea, Broly. It'd work in a multiplayer mecha game; you could give commands to teammates by pointing out enemies using the controller as a touchscreen, marking out the map and trying to issue commands as needed.

Multiplayer FPS could assign different abilities to players, reflected by the screen. Maybe the demolitions guy uses it to set the charges, or someone is in a commander mode and issuing directives.

Nintendo has a history of saying EXACTLY what they are planning on doing with upcoming stuff, but making it sound innocuous at the time. I need to find the exact quote (really I need a transcript), but Iwata made strange comments back at GDC concerning the exact idea of multiple screens, as I mentioned below in that thread:



I'm thinking this is going to be the deal, marrying some DS like ideas with a home console. Predict this now, hate later. Guess we'll find out in a few weeks.[/QUOTE]
True, that is a way of envisioning Broly's idea that would work, much different than what I thought he meant.
 
[quote name='omster']No need to feel old. I'm older. I've heard of the movies plenty, just never had the interest to watch.[/QUOTE]

Watch! Watch! They're fantastic. Well, the first two are anyway, and the third's okay if I remember right. These are real classics...instant classics actually.
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']Watch! Watch! They're fantastic. Well, the first two are anyway, and the third's okay if I remember right. These are real classics...instant classics actually.[/QUOTE]

The first two were men's movies that last one was a women's movie. It's too bad there wasn't a fourth movie within a few years of the last one. I'm afraid if they made one today they would ruin it all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top