Nintendo: "We Have to do Better When We Launch NX"

[Yopaz]

No, we know it's going to REVOLUTIONARY and INNOVATIVE and AMAZING and some other buzzwords, isn't that enough for you? I am annoyed that they haven't given us anything concrete to be honest, but I think I know why. If this console is a successor to the Wii U it will hurt Wii U sales from now and until the launch of NX (which might not be a solid launch considering fans feel betrayed by the quick transition to a new console). By giving us vague information they avoid that and still get us throwing money at the Wii U. What they should have learned form the Wii U is that giving vague information doesn't help them one bit.

Then they shouldn't have mentioned the NX at all.

No, the existance of the NX has been no secret. Nintendo is just guarding the details for whatever reason, maybe it's because the hardware is underwhelming.

Not sure how this is a response to me, but honestly if they got no real information then they can keep it to themselves. Honestly I am sick of hearing what the NX isn't going to be and how it's going to be innovative and such. Also a console with underwhelming hardware? Stop the presses! All the consoles are lacking in hardware. If this had been 2010 then sure, the PS4 and the Xbox One would be decent, almost good. If you want good hardware you don't play console games.

 

[WeepingAngels]

No, we know it's going to REVOLUTIONARY and INNOVATIVE and AMAZING and some other buzzwords, isn't that enough for you? I am annoyed that they haven't given us anything concrete to be honest, but I think I know why. If this console is a successor to the Wii U it will hurt Wii U sales from now and until the launch of NX (which might not be a solid launch considering fans feel betrayed by the quick transition to a new console). By giving us vague information they avoid that and still get us throwing money at the Wii U. What they should have learned form the Wii U is that giving vague information doesn't help them one bit.

Then they shouldn't have mentioned the NX at all.

No, the existance of the NX has been no secret. Nintendo is just guarding the details for whatever reason, maybe it's because the hardware is underwhelming.

Not sure how this is a response to me, but honestly if they got no real information then they can keep it to themselves. Honestly I am sick of hearing what the NX isn't going to be and how it's going to be innovative and such. Also a console with underwhelming hardware? Stop the presses! All the consoles are lacking in hardware. If this had been 2010 then sure, the PS4 and the Xbox One would be decent, almost good. If you want good hardware you don't play console games.

You said you think you know why they have been tight lipped about the NX, it's so they don't harm the Wii U sales. I said that if they wanted that, they should have kept the NX a secret a long time ago.

Oh boy, you are one of those 'all consoles are weak compared to PC' people. Sorry to have disturbed you, carry on.

 

[Yopaz]

You said you think you know why they have been tight lipped about the NX, it's so they don't harm the Wii U sales. I said that if they wanted that, they should have kept the NX a secret a long time ago.

Not what I said. I said that being tight-lipped makes people uncertain and hesitant to buy the Wii U. It was a comment on the current state and the problem with Nintendo just giving us vague information. Right now we know next to nothing about the console. At some point it was even unclear whether it would replace the WiiU or the 3DS making it hard to justify buying either.

I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, I might have worded myself poorly. I do think that it would be better to not say anything at all than to give us vague information.

Oh boy, you are one of those 'all consoles are weak compared to PC' people. Sorry to have disturbed you, carry on.

Yes, I am one of those people who make conclusions based on quantitatively proven information rather than subjective experience. I'm not saying that consoles are weak, thus they are useless. I am saying that consoles are weak, thus we shouldn't really measure their worth based on hardware. There are plenty of reasons to pick a console over a PC, but hardware is not one of them. If you can dismiss the next Nintendo console based on hardware why can't I dismiss the PS4 based on hardware?

The answer is that it would be really stupid to dismiss anything based on hardware. The games are what matters, the functionality matters, the features matter and the hardware just needs to be 'good enough'. The PS4 is unable to run games at the same fps and resolution as my PC from 5 years ago and frankly I won't be impressed if the next console they will release manage that because by then my computer will be getting close to 6 years old at the very least.

But let's get back to the question here, why do you feel like you can criticize Nintendo consoles based on hardware when I can't criticize all consoles based on hardware?

 

[WeepingAngels]

You said you think you know why they have been tight lipped about the NX, it's so they don't harm the Wii U sales. I said that if they wanted that, they should have kept the NX a secret a long time ago.

Not what I said. I said that being tight-lipped makes people uncertain and hesitant to buy the Wii U. It was a comment on the current state and the problem with Nintendo just giving us vague information. Right now we know next to nothing about the console. At some point it was even unclear whether it would replace the WiiU or the 3DS making it hard to justify buying either.

I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, I might have worded myself poorly. I do think that it would be better to not say anything at all than to give us vague information.

Oh boy, you are one of those 'all consoles are weak compared to PC' people. Sorry to have disturbed you, carry on.

Yes, I am one of those people who make conclusions based on quantitatively proven information rather than subjective experience. I'm not saying that consoles are weak, thus they are useless. I am saying that consoles are weak, thus we shouldn't really measure their worth based on hardware. There are plenty of reasons to pick a console over a PC, but hardware is not one of them. If you can dismiss the next Nintendo console based on hardware why can't I dismiss the PS4 based on hardware?

The answer is that it would be really stupid to dismiss anything based on hardware. The games are what matters, the functionality matters, the features matter and the hardware just needs to be 'good enough'. The PS4 is unable to run games at the same fps and resolution as my PC from 5 years ago and frankly I won't be impressed if the next console they will release manage that because by then my computer will be getting close to 6 years old at the very least.

But let's get back to the question here, why do you feel like you can criticize Nintendo consoles based on hardware when I can't criticize all consoles based on hardware?

1) I, for one, am pretty sick of every conversation being about how the PC is superior in every way. It's to the point that I don't even want to talk to those of the 'master race'.

2) It is fine to compare console hardware to other console hardware. The reason why is because if the hardware is too weak, Nintendo won't get third party support again. This is relevant to make a purchase decision. They still may not get third party support due to some gimmick or shitty licensing terms but weak hardware hurt them this generation. No, it wouldn't be stupid to dismiss another Nintendo console based on weak hardware.

3) I don't see Sony losing third party support because it's weaker than PC. In fact, I would say that in many cases, PS4 is the lead platform.

 

[Yopaz]

You said you think you know why they have been tight lipped about the NX, it's so they don't harm the Wii U sales. I said that if they wanted that, they should have kept the NX a secret a long time ago.

Not what I said. I said that being tight-lipped makes people uncertain and hesitant to buy the Wii U. It was a comment on the current state and the problem with Nintendo just giving us vague information. Right now we know next to nothing about the console. At some point it was even unclear whether it would replace the WiiU or the 3DS making it hard to justify buying either.

I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, I might have worded myself poorly. I do think that it would be better to not say anything at all than to give us vague information.

Oh boy, you are one of those 'all consoles are weak compared to PC' people. Sorry to have disturbed you, carry on.

Yes, I am one of those people who make conclusions based on quantitatively proven information rather than subjective experience. I'm not saying that consoles are weak, thus they are useless. I am saying that consoles are weak, thus we shouldn't really measure their worth based on hardware. There are plenty of reasons to pick a console over a PC, but hardware is not one of them. If you can dismiss the next Nintendo console based on hardware why can't I dismiss the PS4 based on hardware?

The answer is that it would be really stupid to dismiss anything based on hardware. The games are what matters, the functionality matters, the features matter and the hardware just needs to be 'good enough'. The PS4 is unable to run games at the same fps and resolution as my PC from 5 years ago and frankly I won't be impressed if the next console they will release manage that because by then my computer will be getting close to 6 years old at the very least.

But let's get back to the question here, why do you feel like you can criticize Nintendo consoles based on hardware when I can't criticize all consoles based on hardware?

1) I, for one, am pretty sick of every conversation being about how the PC is superior in every way. It's to the point that I don't even want to talk to those of the 'master race'.

2) It is fine to compare console hardware to other console hardware. The reason why is because if the hardware is too weak, Nintendo won't get third party support again. This is relevant to make a purchase decision. They still may not get third party support due to some gimmick or shitty licensing terms but weak hardware hurt them this generation. No, it wouldn't be stupid to dismiss another Nintendo console based on weak hardware.

3) I don't see Sony losing third party support because it's weaker than PC. In fact, I would say that in many cases, PS4 is the lead platform.

First of all, I pointed out that you misunderstood me. Why is there no metion of that in your post?

1. I didn't say consoles are useless. I said consoles are quantitatively weaker. I said there are several reasons to play games on consoles, but you simply choose that my words mean "Hurr durr, PC MASTER RACE". I haven't once used the term PC master race until this point.

2. Basically saying "Hardware matters when I bring it up, not when you bring it up". I really should stop taking you seriously right there.

Then how about bring up console hardware and their success. Last generation the Wii had great success in the launch period despite basically belonging to the previous generation in all but marketing. Before that The PS2, the weakest console of the three main competitors crushed its competition. The PS1 was the victor of the generation before that despite the Nintendo 64 having a far better CPU (3 times faster), slightly more RAM and supported higher resolutions. The SNES was slightly more powerful than its competition in some aspects, weaker in some, but it was narrow. Overall the SNES was likely the more powerful, but I do not have benchmarks for any software to verify this. It was also the best selling console. I could analyze previous generations, but my point is that the most powerful console has rarely been the best selling one. Nintendo got problems they need to solve and it's more than just hardware.


3. Never said anything about that. This is however an example playing right into my hand as my point is that gamers do not care about the best hardware. They care about the games. Hardware needs to be 'good enough', a point I made in my previous post.

Lastly; stop getting annoyed at me for pointing out facts and stop inserting your own interpretation in my posts.

 

[WeepingAngels]

1. I didn't say consoles are useless. I said consoles are quantitatively weaker. I said there are several reasons to play games on consoles, but you simply choose that my words mean "Hurr durr, PC MASTER RACE". I haven't once used the term PC master race until this point.

I didn't say that you said that consoles are useless but you are the one who brought up the mighty PC in a thread about a new Nintendo console? Why do that? Did you think that maybe there was someone left out there that was unaware of that consoles are weaker than PC's?

2. Basically saying "Hardware matters when I bring it up, not when you bring it up". I really should stop taking you seriously right there.

I already explained this. The PS4 being weaker than PC hasn't hurt it but the Wii U being weaker than it's competitors has hurt it. When Nintendo goes weak, they go so weak that multiplats are almost impossible.

Then how about bring up console hardware and their success. Last generation the Wii had great success in the launch period despite basically belonging to the previous generation in all but marketing. Before that The PS2, the weakest console of the three main competitors crushed its competition. The PS1 was the victor of the generation before that despite the Nintendo 64 having a far better CPU (3 times faster), slightly more RAM and supported higher resolutions. The SNES was slightly more powerful than its competition in some aspects, weaker in some, but it was narrow. Overall the SNES was likely the more powerful, but I do not have benchmarks for any software to verify this. It was also the best selling console. I could analyze previous generations, but my point is that the most powerful console has rarely been the best selling one. Nintendo got problems they need to solve and it's more than just hardware.

The Wii was successful despite it's weakness. Everyone bought it for it's potential but abandoned it soon enough. The PS2 wasn't so weak that it couldn't share some Gamecube ports and the PS1 came out ahead because the games were cheaper and CD's allowed for bigger games. It also wasn't too much weaker than it's competition.

Bottom line, if your console is far weaker than the lead platform, you won't get multiplat games. Being weaker is fine as long as you aren't too weak. Just to be clear, PC is rarely ever the lead platform unless the game is a PC exclusive. Last gen it was the 360 in most cases and this gen it's the PS4.

3. Never said anything about that. This is however an example playing right into my hand as my point is that gamers do not care about the best hardware. They care about the games. Hardware needs to be 'good enough', a point I made in my previous post.

Oh, is that your point? Then please tell me why you brought up how weak consoles are compared to PC's?

Lastly; stop getting annoyed at me for pointing out facts and stop inserting your own interpretation in my posts.

Some facts don't belong in all conversations. For example, there was an earthquake today in Oklahoma. You may be wondering what that has to do with a thread about an upcoming Nintendo console....

Just so you aren't confused about my position.

- I think that Nintendo being silent about the NX is possibly due to not wanting to reveal it's relatively weak hardware. Relative to it's direct competition, other consoles not the fuckin' PC.

- Everyone already knows that the PC is the mightiest of them all. You can stop spreading the PC gospel in threads not related to PC gaming.

 

[Yopaz]

SNIP

You brought up hardware in a news article about Nintendo's marketing failure. Totally relevant.
I brought up PC hardware when you started this discussion about hardware Not even remotely connected to a discussion about hardware.
You brought up an earthquake, also totally relevant.

This is you disagreeing on facts, not you willing to discuss, but before I stop give me one last chance to explain my stance. The popularity over consoles despite how comparatively weak they are shows that most gamers don't really care about owning the best hardware. They want the best games. Some want to justify their purchase by arguing that their console is the best, but it's really a pointless endeavour since the reason PS4 is better than XBOX One or the Wii U being the best is all subjective. Subjective reasons are the most important reasons because they matter to you. You have accused me of being one of the people proudly announcing that I am of the PC master race, but you have the same kind of argument towards Nintendo as those have against all the consoles. I think people should play on whatever platform they like and be happy with it. Discuss hardware and I will correct your delusions about them though.

 

[WeepingAngels]

SNIP

You brought up hardware in a news article about Nintendo's marketing failure. Totally relevant.
I brought up PC hardware when you started this discussion about hardware Not even remotely connected to a discussion about hardware.
You brought up an earthquake, also totally relevant.

This is you disagreeing on facts, not you willing to discuss, but before I stop give me one last chance to explain my stance. The popularity over consoles despite how comparatively weak they are shows that most gamers don't really care about owning the best hardware. They want the best games. Some want to justify their purchase by arguing that their console is the best, but it's really a pointless endeavour since the reason PS4 is better than XBOX One or the Wii U being the best is all subjective. Subjective reasons are the most important reasons because they matter to you. You have accused me of being one of the people proudly announcing that I am of the PC master race, but you have the same kind of argument towards Nintendo as those have against all the consoles. I think people should play on whatever platform they like and be happy with it. Discuss hardware and I will correct your delusions about them though.

1) I brought up hardware because Nintendo is telling us nothing about the NX. They are not doing better so far and I think that's on topic

2) I brought up the earthquake because it was irrelevant, to make a point. You knew that, atleast I hope you did since it was obvious.

3) This thread is about Nintendo, it's ok to have an opinion about Nintendo in a thread about Nintendo. Taking the opportunity to bring up 'all consoles are weak compared to the PC' is off topic. If we were talking about minivans would you tell us how Mustangs are more powerful?

4) My argument against Nintendo having weak hardware is that it limits their library. It is a purchase consideration. This thread is about how Nintendo has to do better with the NX launch than they did with the Wii U launch and right now we know nothing for sure.

I am done with this.

 

[FalloutJack]

Snip

In deferance to WeepingAngel, I'd like to add that I work console and PC. The argument itself is pointless because their pros and cons make them comparable to each other. Put simply, there's a huge market for both and still room for other things like mobile and virtual gaming. Because the business exists, it is equitable on all those fronts. The superiority of any of these is basically unprovable. You should probably take this to Game Industry Discussion.

 

[Yopaz]

Snip

In deferance to WeepingAngel, I'd like to add that I work console and PC. The argument itself is pointless because their pros and cons make them comparable to each other. Put simply, there's a huge market for both and still room for other things like mobile and virtual gaming. Because the business exists, it is equitable on all those fronts. The superiority of any of these is basically unprovable. You should probably take this to Game Industry Discussion.

Please not the use o9f the word "quantitatively", as in things that can be measured. This can and has been proven multiple times. No subjective opinions on my side there.

I also never once said that consoles don't have a place. I just said that their hardware is weak. Stop inserting your own interpretation in my posts. Unlike WeepingAngel I am in fact saying that hardware doesn't matter in the big picture so why I am getting the hardware snob stamp is incomprehensible to me.

TLR If you're not going to read my posts, don't bother responding to them.

 

[FalloutJack]

If you're not going to read my posts-

Well, since you obviously didn't read mine or pay attention to the subject at hand, the fault really lies with thee.

 

[Yopaz]

If you're not going to read my posts-

Well, since you obviously didn't read mine or pay attention to the subject at hand, the fault really lies with thee.

How is it my fault that you didn't read my post before you responded to it? You quoted me first, the fault is all yours dude.

 

[FalloutJack]

If you're not going to read my posts-

Well, since you obviously didn't read mine or pay attention to the subject at hand, the fault really lies with thee.

How is it my fault that you didn't read my post before you responded to it? You quoted me first, the fault is all yours dude.

I never said I did. I'm agreeing with WeepingAngel that you did. Can't help you with that.

 

[Yopaz]

If you're not going to read my posts-

Well, since you obviously didn't read mine or pay attention to the subject at hand, the fault really lies with thee.

How is it my fault that you didn't read my post before you responded to it? You quoted me first, the fault is all yours dude.

I never said I did. I'm agreeing with WeepingAngel that you did. Can't help you with that.

Care to make that coherent? I'm really trying to interpret what you're saying here, but I'm at a loss. Are you saying you never claimed to read my post? Because if that's the case I know I should just ignore you from now on.

 

[FalloutJack]

If you're not going to read my posts-

Well, since you obviously didn't read mine or pay attention to the subject at hand, the fault really lies with thee.

How is it my fault that you didn't read my post before you responded to it? You quoted me first, the fault is all yours dude.

I never said I did. I'm agreeing with WeepingAngel that you did. Can't help you with that.

Care to make that coherent? I'm really trying to interpret what you're saying here, but I'm at a loss. Are you saying you never claimed to read my post? Because if that's the case I know I should just ignore you from now on.

Look, you made a mistake, it happens. We're all willing to move on if you are.

 

[Yopaz]

If you're not going to read my posts-

Well, since you obviously didn't read mine or pay attention to the subject at hand, the fault really lies with thee.

How is it my fault that you didn't read my post before you responded to it? You quoted me first, the fault is all yours dude.

I never said I did. I'm agreeing with WeepingAngel that you did. Can't help you with that.

Care to make that coherent? I'm really trying to interpret what you're saying here, but I'm at a loss. Are you saying you never claimed to read my post? Because if that's the case I know I should just ignore you from now on.

Look, you made a mistake, it happens. We're all willing to move on if you are.

I honestly don't know what you're talking about, this kinda feels like having a conversation with a chat robot from the mid 2000's. So how about this: I will ignore you and go play Monster Hunter and you can find someone else to relentlessly pester? Sounds good?

 

[FalloutJack]

If you're not going to read my posts-

Well, since you obviously didn't read mine or pay attention to the subject at hand, the fault really lies with thee.

How is it my fault that you didn't read my post before you responded to it? You quoted me first, the fault is all yours dude.

I never said I did. I'm agreeing with WeepingAngel that you did. Can't help you with that.

Care to make that coherent? I'm really trying to interpret what you're saying here, but I'm at a loss. Are you saying you never claimed to read my post? Because if that's the case I know I should just ignore you from now on.

Look, you made a mistake, it happens. We're all willing to move on if you are.

I honestly don't know what you're talking about, this kinda feels like having a conversation with a chat robot from the mid 2000's. So how about this: I will ignore you and go play Monster Hunter and you can find someone else to relentlessly pester? Sounds good?

Well, that's proof that you didn't read the posts if I ever saw one.