It would, and I don't expect it because I have at least some faith in the wsj reports of an sdk for multiple forms being true. But my only doubt comes from the context of Iwata saying that quote not even 3 months after the Wii u launched.
That makes sense to me. It wouldn't be the first time Nintendo changed their mind about hardware. I suppose it's also possible that multiple form factors could mean "within the console space" or "within the HH space." I guess we really are just living out a Waiting for Kimi-san adaptation at this point.
I think quite a few people in this thread are seriously overestimating the extent to which home titles will be able to run on the hh with a mere visuals downgrade - there won't be such a thing for anything outside of low-CPU-usage games like Mario Tennis and the likes. The only scenario where this would be feasible is if nintendo gimped the home unit significantly. That won't happen - it makes zero sense. HH titles running on the home unit - yes. Down-ports with decreased game logic complexity - yes. Full-blown home titles running on the hh with a mere IQ downgrade - no. And this is before considering factors like GPGPU which may or may not scale with res at all.
Thank you. This is the kind of stuff I gave very little knowledge or understanding about. So perhaps in terms of cross-compatibility more realistic expectations include: eShop games, VC, and the ability to play (some, all?) HH games on the console. I want to temper my expectations and keep them in the realm of reality. So if what you're telling me is that we are almost certainly not getting full cross-compatibility, I am happy to defer to your expertise. Would this include Smash-style ports across console/HH as being less likely, though? That is to say, if the console is at XB1 level power, do downports become less feasible, however powerful we expect the HH to be? Or if it is doable, would it be too much a drain on resources?
Yes, their accounts for their future Handheld and future Console will be compatible with each other, that still doesn't explain what NX is though. NX could be a code name for a single device that will work with the other member of the family of systems codenamed "GX". NX and GX will be connected under the same account system, just like iPhone and iPad devices are connected under one account system. They can still be separate systems like how iPhone and iPad are.
If Wii U was a more attractive product, it would have sold more, it just wasn't. The games are solid, but the environment for them was just too disturbed and unorganized to have much potential.
I was under the impression that most or all iOS games work on iPhone and iPad. Is that not generally the case? I don't play many games on my iPad. In fact I think our cat has more iPad games than we do.
I think if the Wii U had a different name, brand, price and lacked the tablet...it would have done GCN numbers and no more. In that scenario I'm assuming we would have seen more third party ports and maybe less late to arrive. This line of thinking leads me to believe the NX console and handheld each need a significant hook.
There you go. Nintendo definitely need a game/hook to reignite interest on a mass scale. However, once people get hooked, Nintendo need to create an environment which allows for a more diverse library than what Wii got (not to downplay its library--It's fantastic, but was lacking in key areas). I agree that Nintendo cannot rely on major third party support from western studios out of the gate. It would be a huge mistake, however, to create a console which doesn't allow for them to bring over their games once NX (hopefully) proves itself in the market. Actually, I'd be pretty surprised if Nintendo weren't pulling whatever strings they can in order to get Call of Duty on NX this year. This notion that NX should be a big "F U" to western third parties at its core design is madness. That's not how Nintendo are going to survive in the industry.
I am also somewhat befuddled as to why so many want the exact same games downgraded onto a HH. I mean, let's envision an airport stage in Mario Kart. On the NX home console, there are weather effects, flashing lights everywhere, multiple planes taking off and landing, just impressive things going on in the BG all around. In order to get it to run on the handheld, Nintendo need to cut out all that extra visual flair and the skies are barren. At what point does it stop being the same stage? Is this really what folks want? Why not create additional stages that work better on the small screen and add to the overall variety for those people with both form factors?
Also, I'm in no way trying to rule out cross platform software. There's no reason they can't have your Mario RPGs, Mario Sports titles, Pushmos, and a whole ton more run across multiple hardware types. I'm talking more about specific games like Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Zelda, Metroid, and others which for a variety of reasons make more sense to tailor to a specific machine.
And what better way to do that than via exclusive games/levels? We all know that software sells hardware. Yet, right here we have people saying they don't want a Nintendo console. They just want a handheld. Or you have people only wanting a powerful console who could care less about portables. That's not a good thing, because even with a unified development environment, if a console fails that millions and millions in R&D, inventory, etc flushed down the toilet. Iwata seemed to acknowledge that many western gamers prefer consoles. The PS2 is the best selling piece of gaming hardware of all time and the 3DS will not catch up to any of last generation's home consoles. With mobile taking a huge chunk of the market, there's even more uncertainty in the handheld arena. Nintendo need to do whatever it takes in order to make all of their hardware thrive. Offering gamers a simple "choice" with the same lineup is not the way to do that. Each piece of hardware needs to play to its own strengths and there should be more benefits to buying hardware than just where it can be played.
I'm going to take this paragraph by paragraph since you said a lot and I really appreciate it. Let's see.
(1) I completely concur about Nintendo and western third parties. I don't want the big N to flip them the bird or ignore them. I hope it didn't read like I was indicating that I wanted that, because that's definitely not what I was trying to say. I think Japanese third parties will be much easier to get on board for a HH or console, but I also believe that with the right environment and ease of porting there can be a way for Nintendo to gain ground with western publishers as well. FWIW, I still contend that there is--especially if NX doesn't offer universal cross-compatibility--a possible space for Nintendo and Microsoft to bring the latter's IPs to the handheld realm once again.
(2) Here's where I get a bit lost in your MK example, no offense at all intended: don't all console MK games offer effects their handheld counterpart can't possibly replicate? So the example you give then makes me think Nintendo may as well build a MK engine for console, scale it down to HH and offer completely different games and levels for each of those. I'm having some trouble picturing games where an argument couldn't be made for different levels entirely for those games that would be only sort of cross-compatibility. Does that make sense? Just kinda spitballing here. I suppose you could take games that could readily be on both systems, like a Mario vs. DK, and offer levels with special effects on the console that the HH can't pull off, but then I feel like those sorts of easily-ported games are the kind that typically wouldn't generally see such kinds of high-end, graphically impressive levels made for them.
Let's say for instance Wii U ports go cross-gen to NX console, though. In that scenario is NX HH also powerful enough to handle a Wii U port?
(3) I see your point entirely about the kinds of games that would readily support cross-compatibility. One part of this line of thinking that trips me up a bit, though, is--why not just offer all the HH games on the console? Mainly because they may require a HH-specific hook-type control scheme or method of play? Or...I mean...from a business standpoint, just to not so strongly disincentivize players from buying just the console in the West, where HHs are less popular in general? Or perhaps Nintendo may want to continue to focus on more bite-sized style HH games, with Mario's and Zelda's for example more 2D and/or level-based as has been the general M.O. for HH vs. console per Nintendo? (We saw a lessening of this in the 3DS thus far, compared to prior Nintendo HHs, but it's still a philosophy clearly present in many of Nintendo's HH games.)
(4) Thanks for this. Helps me see the whole thing a bit differently, especially in the context of blu's post above. I do think there is a bit more to the idea of having the same games portable vs. console than just where you play them. Such as HD, online features (ability to use Ethernet and a headset, both of which are harder to pull off in public 😉
, handheld specific features like 3D, etc. But I take your point nonetheless. If Nintendo wants multiple platforms to be successful, they each need their own meaningful hook and perhaps primarily their own software. (Is there a ratio you had in mind for how much first party software would be cross-compatibility? Like a third? That's kinda the sense I got from your post, but I'm just curious if that's in line with what you're postulating.)
Ok! I think that's it. I think you and blu have me now swayed towards the school of thought that says we get a HH this year and console next. With maybe 1/3 of games being cross-compatible. Is that what you're expecting?
Well I'm just buying the home console, so the less effort spent on doing anything else the better
People want Nintendo to fix their software drought problem. The library sharing thing seems like a more feasible solution than them getting full fledged 3rd party support any time soon. I want to see more effort to producing more games and a greater variety of games, rather than just working on different versions of the same game for different hardware.
Fourth and blu, this is where my unease about not having a shared library comes in. Malus a valid point here that I don't know a good alternate answer to. Let's say NX can't get third parties as significantly on board as we would like. In that case, if Nintendo is again having mostly games that are only available on the console and HH, how will they account for droughts? I mean you, Fourth, did indicate above you think many games could in fact be cross-platform, but then given what you, blu, say above about downsampling being less feasible...what's a good answer for Nintendo here? For maybe 1/3 of games to be cross-platform and then make an environment third parties will have a hard time saying no to, especially Japanese ones?
What if Nintendo was happy with a beefed up handheld being their home console? Think Apple TV or Amazon Fire TV.
That's back to the traditional hybrid, then, or at least something more resembling a the PS3/Vita setup. Hmm. It's hard for me to see Nintendo making such a powerful handheld that would be reasonable as their sole console via such a device and also be cheap enough to not get destroyed in the market.
