Nintendo's Next Console Won't Arrive Before April 2012, Won't Be 3D

  • 97 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by Hailinel (24778 posts) -
@fox01313 said:
" Skip 3d Nintendo for the console, go with things people will actually want like better online community, HD graphics, zero friend codes, less 3rd party garbageware games. "
Read the article.  Nintendo has specifically stated that their next console will not support 3D.
#52 Posted by DeF (4887 posts) -
@PenguinDust said:
" Can't Nintendo just tack-on 3D at a later date via a firmware update like Sony did?  I can see it not being available out of the box, but I don't see much point in excluding the possibility at some point in the future.   "
sure they could. but it would look pretty weird if their whole schtick with 3DS was "no glasses!" and then they go and say "now put on your glasses for 3D on our new home console".

Anyway, I'm glad they're not doing the 3D thing. I'm cool with small chunks of 3D on 3DS where I can control its intensity or turn it off without much of a hassle.
#53 Posted by Levio (1784 posts) -

Whoah, Nintendo is leapfrogging 3D and going straight to 4D.


GENIUS
#54 Posted by GozerTC (457 posts) -
@Blair said:
"Klepek servin' up a fresh batch of Grandma's cookies! "


Agreed.  :)

 

This sounds pretty in line with what Norm, Will, and Gary were thinking about on the Tested Podcast last week.  No 3D and after April next year.

#55 Posted by Napalm (9020 posts) -
@TehFlan said:
" @DonutFever said:
" @KaosAngel said:
" It gonna be the Dreamcast. "
The Driimcast. "
I made this joke in person the other day, although it had more to do with the screen on the controller. It makes less sense when you try to say it out loud. "
You're crazy. It makes more sense when you say it out loud.
#56 Posted by RPG_Master (7 posts) -
@White_Silhouette said:
" Either way I do really hope Nintendo doesn't make the online a hassle like it has been so far. "
I got to mess with my friend's new 3DS this weekend. I was really surprised by it's "Friend Cards"* system it's got going. I think you trade a code once and it works across all games, and actually lets you see if they are online and what they are playing. If they're doing this on the 3DS it's a pretty sure thing they're going to do this same system for the Wii 2.

*Forgot the exact name :P
#57 Posted by Silock (238 posts) -

They are wording this as if to say its confirmed, quite a poor choice of words Giantbomb. Its all rumor and speculation, lets not forget that. 

#58 Posted by chickdigger802 (502 posts) -

Finally!

Watch next gen MS and Sony consoles be only 3D. Nintendo's would be the only system without a blurry mess of graphics and they score money trees because us slow adapters only have shitty HD tvs. But I guess that will all change when the 3d cable adapter transition happens in 2020 ;)

#59 Posted by ptys (1955 posts) -

Virtual reality of some sort? Either way it's great news to know we'll at least get to see something in the near future. I have a backlog of Gamecube games and there are a few Wii titles I've been dying to check out so the if there is backwards compatibility as has been rumored that would be a compelling  argument for me to pick one up. I don't really think I can own all three major consoles though? Just don't have the room!

#60 Posted by ptys (1955 posts) -
@Silock said:
" They are wording this as if to say its confirmed, quite a poor choice of words Giantbomb. Its all rumor and speculation, lets not forget that.  "
No, it's official!
Nintendos' next console
#61 Posted by Xpgamer7 (2382 posts) -

Not being designed for 3D is a good move in my opinion. It'll allow the console to become more widely accepted.

#62 Posted by S0ndor (2716 posts) -

Literally nobody is buying 3D TV's, so this seems like the right move.

#63 Posted by ArcLyte (884 posts) -
@DivineCC said:
" @Tarsier: @Tarsier said:
" thanks patrick youre way better than brad nicholson "
Harsh. You can't really compare the two and they focus on two different areas of video game news. Patrick is more insider/behind the scenes news while Brad is more press release news. Plenty of  room on the site for both of them. "
this.
#64 Posted by Mike76x (558 posts) -

Is the new console gonna have a Blu-Ray drive that can't play Blu-Ray movies, like the Wii's Non-DVD DVD drive?

#65 Posted by FluxWaveZ (19339 posts) -
@Silock said:
" They are wording this as if to say its confirmed, quite a poor choice of words Giantbomb. Its all rumor and speculation, lets not forget that.  "
`You should actually read the article before jumping to conclusions.
#66 Posted by MisterMouse (3553 posts) -

I am glad there is no 3D

#67 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -
@ArcLyte said:
" @DivineCC said:
" @Tarsier: @Tarsier said:
" thanks patrick youre way better than brad nicholson "
Harsh. You can't really compare the two and they focus on two different areas of video game news. Patrick is more insider/behind the scenes news while Brad is more press release news. Plenty of  room on the site for both of them. "
this. "
I appreciate the diplomatic kissassery but sometimes people are better at things than other people. Patrick's better than Brad N because its not Kotaku copypasta.
#68 Posted by Hailinel (24778 posts) -
@Levio said:
" Whoah, Nintendo is leapfrogging 3D and going straight to 4D.

GENIUS
"
I can see through the veil of time!
#69 Posted by Deusx (1904 posts) -

Wiimcast, CALLING IT.

#70 Posted by Pop (2633 posts) -

I'm wondering what they will call it, wii 2, the mario, the nintendo entertainment thingy

#71 Posted by fenixREVOLUTION (735 posts) -

So no 3D? That's good. Take out motion controls and you just might have me.

#72 Posted by MormonWarrior (2592 posts) -

For once I'm glad Nintendo is behind the curve - on the 3D crap I mean. They've got the 3DS, and that's more than enough.

#73 Posted by WhytePanther (107 posts) -

Saying "No 3D" is really odd, moreso when you consider that 3D wasn't really even a pipe dream when the 360 and PS3 launched, and yet they are now both capable of it.  If you want to say that 3D is not a focus of your console, that' s one thing.  But to say you're not supporting it...  well now you're already one step behind consoles released five years ago.

#74 Posted by blaakmawf (543 posts) -

I'm gonna wait so hard!

#75 Posted by BraveToaster (12590 posts) -
@KaosAngel said:

" It gonna be the Dreamcast. "

I read that in Ollie William's voice.

#76 Posted by vdortizo (119 posts) -

They should release the console on December 21 2012... at midnight.

#77 Posted by danimal_furry (1453 posts) -

Best news ever!
#78 Posted by robbob88 (326 posts) -

Hmm. Sounds just like what Nintendo said about HD when the Wii came out, not enough of an audience which was the stupidest thing I have ever heard in my entire fucking life.

#79 Edited by Battletoad (130 posts) -


I don't own a 3D set, and have no intentions of buying one in the future, but it's pretty lame that Nintendo won't even support the feature at a hardware level. If Sony could offer a firmware update for support for 3D on  the PS3, which was created well before the offical 3D standard was even created, I don't see why Nintendo couldn't as well, but I also don't understand why this new console will not even ship with such support.

 

Well, maybe I do. Nintendo might not want to dangle carrots out to its customers to go buy a 3D TV, since that could put dollars into Sony's pockets, especially if Sony will be getting a percentage of every game sale for the new system assuming it uses BluRay.

 

Nintendo also probably doesn't want to step on the toes of the 3DS. If they offer Mario on a big screen in 3D AND HD at the same time,---potentially for around only 3 times the cost of a 3DS (you never know, some 3D sets might be around 750-800 dollars by next fall) then that would surely hurt 3DS sales. PLus Nintendo would have to backtrack on the whole "3D without the glasses is better" stance they have taken while trying to hype the 3DS.

 

Hopefully this is something that Nintendo plans to quietly implement via firmware within a couple of years, but then again the Wii never went past 480P here in 2011, even though the PS2 and XboX 1 had the occational 720P and 1080i games. It would be nice to know upfront that a new console purchase in 2012 for 300-plus dollars would offer any potentially important features that consoles released in 2005-2006 already offer.

 

 

#80 Posted by MechaDestroyer (40 posts) -

Considering 3D is dying as a format: no surprise.

#81 Posted by Claude (16254 posts) -

I just got HD, slow the fuck down people.

#82 Posted by tourgen (4500 posts) -

alright, good for nintendo.  I'm pretty  curious on what hardware guts they've spec'ed out for their new box.  It sounds like they're going for the generic baseline 3rd party ports, but maybe with some future-proofing?  It sounds like a bit of a gamble.  maybe they're going to do something nuts like run an Android core and allow Android tablet apps to run using a touch pad/screen on the controller?  Yeah, probably not but I can't wait to see what they do.

#83 Posted by c_rakestraw (853 posts) -
@robbob88 said:
" Hmm. Sounds just like what Nintendo said about HD when the Wii came out, not enough of an audience which was the stupidest thing I have ever heard in my entire fucking life. "
I don't know, makes sense to me. Why push something that hasn't yet been widely adopted? You're only punishing the consumers then for not having all the right tech in those cases. I mean, heck, the Wii lacked HD but still ended up on top this generation. I think that's proven that Nintendo knows what their doing in that regard.
#84 Posted by Wrighteous86 (3782 posts) -
@C_Rakestraw said:
" @robbob88 said:
" Hmm. Sounds just like what Nintendo said about HD when the Wii came out, not enough of an audience which was the stupidest thing I have ever heard in my entire fucking life. "
I don't know, makes sense to me. Why push something that hasn't yet been widely adopted? You're only punishing the consumers then for not having all the right tech in those cases. I mean, heck, the Wii lacked HD but still ended up on top this generation. I think that's proven that Nintendo knows what their doing in that regard. "
Yeah, how many people did you know with an HDTV in 2006? Because I knew like... one. Now almost everyone I know has one. It wasn't forward thinking, but it wasn't a dumb decision by Nintendo either. Saved them money in the long run and now the market is fully ready for HD.
#85 Posted by c_rakestraw (853 posts) -
@Wrighteous86 said:
" @C_Rakestraw said:
" @robbob88 said:
" Hmm. Sounds just like what Nintendo said about HD when the Wii came out, not enough of an audience which was the stupidest thing I have ever heard in my entire fucking life. "
I don't know, makes sense to me. Why push something that hasn't yet been widely adopted? You're only punishing the consumers then for not having all the right tech in those cases. I mean, heck, the Wii lacked HD but still ended up on top this generation. I think that's proven that Nintendo knows what their doing in that regard. "
Yeah, how many people did you know with an HDTV in 2006? Because I knew like... one. Now almost everyone I know has one. It wasn't forward thinking, but it wasn't a dumb decision by Nintendo either. Saved them money in the long run and now the market is fully ready for HD. "
Precisely. Back then high definition was still a new sort of unproven technology. 3D is currently in that same spot, hence why it's smart of Nintendo to not incorporate it yet because, for all we know, come the next console generation after the coming one, 3D might just die out again. Best to wait and see if the current incarnation of 3D is more than just a fad first, I'd think.
#86 Posted by MaddProdigy (1041 posts) -
@ryanwho said:
" @ArcLyte said:
" @DivineCC said:
" @Tarsier: @Tarsier said:
" thanks patrick youre way better than brad nicholson "
Harsh. You can't really compare the two and they focus on two different areas of video game news. Patrick is more insider/behind the scenes news while Brad is more press release news. Plenty of  room on the site for both of them. "
this. "
I appreciate the diplomatic kissassery but sometimes people are better at things than other people. Patrick's better than Brad N because its not Kotaku copypasta. "
What are your credentials allowing you to decide who's a better "journalist"? Oh, just another jack ass on the internet with an opinion? Well good thing someone so authoritative definitively settled such a silly little argument.
#87 Posted by Cook66 (227 posts) -

I bet this will be subpar to the 360 and ps3. It wouldn't suprise me for a second.
If so, this is not a next generation console, it's a current gen console. Hardware wise, the Wii competes with the PS2 and Xbox.

#88 Posted by Rowr (5632 posts) -
"  As most consumers do not own 3DTVs, Nintendo cannot guarantee a 3D-focused console would find enough of an audience."

Is 3D not optional? The playstation has become a 3D focused console, but its not like it makes a difference if your not interested in it.

I dont understand, so are they saying they wont support 3D at all? That doesnt sound accurate, especially after this venture with the 3DS.

Everyone will have 3D capable TV's in the next couple of years anyway - As in it will be built in as a feature for all new tv's and they already cost fuck all anyway, so i'm calling balls on pretty much all of this.
#89 Posted by amir90 (2156 posts) -

Good, I say.

#90 Posted by robbob88 (326 posts) -
@C_Rakestraw said:

" @Wrighteous86 said:

" @C_Rakestraw said:
" @robbob88 said:
" Hmm. Sounds just like what Nintendo said about HD when the Wii came out, not enough of an audience which was the stupidest thing I have ever heard in my entire fucking life. "
I don't know, makes sense to me. Why push something that hasn't yet been widely adopted? You're only punishing the consumers then for not having all the right tech in those cases. I mean, heck, the Wii lacked HD but still ended up on top this generation. I think that's proven that Nintendo knows what their doing in that regard. "
Yeah, how many people did you know with an HDTV in 2006? Because I knew like... one. Now almost everyone I know has one. It wasn't forward thinking, but it wasn't a dumb decision by Nintendo either. Saved them money in the long run and now the market is fully ready for HD. "
Precisely. Back then high definition was still a new sort of unproven technology. 3D is currently in that same spot, hence why it's smart of Nintendo to not incorporate it yet because, for all we know, come the next console generation after the coming one, 3D might just die out again. Best to wait and see if the current incarnation of 3D is more than just a fad first, I'd think. "
Uhmmm. None of you guys know what you are talking about. HD was getting noticed in the late 90's (the fucking 1998 Masters Golf Tournament was broadcasted in HD) and the 00's was the time for HD to become widespread. HD was eventually going to become popular because all HD is is higher resolutions, HD was just the next step in the right direction for the evolution of TV. 3D is more than likely just a fad (like it's always been). It is an unnecessary and SUPER expensive accessory. 

Nintendo not including HD on the Wii was incredibly ignorant. 

3D on the other hand has yet to prove itself as becoming popular. At all. Sales are still low and nobody wants to wear super expensive glasses.
#91 Posted by Hailinel (24778 posts) -
@robbob88:  The Masters may have been broadcast in HD back in 1998, but very, very few people actually owned HD TV sets back then.
#92 Posted by Wrighteous86 (3782 posts) -
@robbob88: Nobody said HD didn't exist. By your logic, the PS2 and Xbox were shitty consoles for not having true HD. It wasn't common for consumers to have HD televisions in 2006.

Remember when the government set up the Digital TV transition, making all television signals HD compliant?  They set that up in 2005, and had it scheduled for February 2009 because they knew the country wasn't ready yet.

The DTV Delay Act changed the mandatory analog cutoff date to June 12, although stations were permitted to cease analog transmissions before the new mandatory cutoff date. The legislation was enacted on February 4, 2009, and on February 11, 2009, President Barack Obama signed it into law. The purpose of the extension was to help the millions of households who had not been able to get their coupons and converters because demand for coupons exceeded the funding provided for in the initial bill, leaving millions on a waiting list to receive coupons. 

So, even with four years notice that they would either need to get and HDTV or and HD converter, millions of Americans still weren't ready for the switch to HD. I understand with you and your gamer friends, you all probably had widescreen HDTVs in your living room, but many people didn't, and that was only two years ago.

Now, look at what Nintendo hoped to accomplish with the Wii: they wanted it to be really cheap, really easy to use, and approachable to non-gamers and families. The same millions of non-gamers and families that didn't get their HD-shit together for 4 years as recently as 2 years ago. Just because you didn't like it, doesn't mean it didn't make good business sense. It made the system worse, but it didn't affect their success in any way... much like their (basically) lack of an online component. Up until last year, less than 3 of every 4 PS3s were connected to the internet, and the other two systems were lower than that. Go back a year or two, and that percentage drops dramatically.

Now internet and HD are expected, so now they'll be putting them in. Again, it sucks that they aren't being more forward thinking, but those were pretty smart cost-cutting choices.
#93 Posted by Poltergeist13 (70 posts) -

Hi-def Metroid & Mario is what dreams are made of.
#94 Posted by robbob88 (326 posts) -

You guys just don't get it. @Wrighteous86 said:

" @robbob88: Nobody said HD didn't exist. By your logic, the PS2 and Xbox were shitty consoles for not having true HD. It wasn't common for consumers to have HD televisions in 2006.

Remember when the government set up the Digital TV transition, making all television signals HD compliant?  They set that up in 2005, and had it scheduled for February 2009 because they knew the country wasn't ready yet.

The DTV Delay Act changed the mandatory analog cutoff date to June 12, although stations were permitted to cease analog transmissions before the new mandatory cutoff date. The legislation was enacted on February 4, 2009, and on February 11, 2009, President Barack Obama signed it into law. The purpose of the extension was to help the millions of households who had not been able to get their coupons and converters because demand for coupons exceeded the funding provided for in the initial bill, leaving millions on a waiting list to receive coupons. 

So, even with four years notice that they would either need to get and HDTV or and HD converter, millions of Americans still weren't ready for the switch to HD. I understand with you and your gamer friends, you all probably had widescreen HDTVs in your living room, but many people didn't, and that was only two years ago.

Now, look at what Nintendo hoped to accomplish with the Wii: they wanted it to be really cheap, really easy to use, and approachable to non-gamers and families. The same millions of non-gamers and families that didn't get their HD-shit together for 4 years as recently as 2 years ago. Just because you didn't like it, doesn't mean it didn't make good business sense. It made the system worse, but it didn't affect their success in any way... much like their (basically) lack of an online component. Up until last year, less than 3 of every 4 PS3s were connected to the internet, and the other two systems were lower than that. Go back a year or two, and that percentage drops dramatically.

Now internet and HD are expected, so now they'll be putting them in. Again, it sucks that they aren't being more forward thinking, but those were pretty smart cost-cutting choices.
"
You guys just don't get it. 

 HD is just higher resolutions. It was the next logical step in the evolution of TV. It was going to happen. And it was going to become popular in the mid to late 00's which is exactly what happened but Nintendo's Wii console was not HD ready when it should have been. Why? Because it was going to be a console for the mid to late 00's which was when HD finally became widespread. It should have AT least been HD ready because it released at a time when HD was just about to take off. There are no excuses for Nintendo not including some sort of HD output. 

And like I said earlier, 3D is just a fad. It is NOT the next LOGICAL step in the TV evolution. TV has always been a moving picture set at a certain resolution with those resolutions getting higher and higher as technology got better.

3D is just an expensive UNNECESSARY accessory.  
#95 Edited by Wrighteous86 (3782 posts) -
@robbob88 said:

" You guys just don't get it.  @Wrighteous86 said:

" @robbob88: Nobody said HD didn't exist. By your logic, the PS2 and Xbox were shitty consoles for not having true HD. It wasn't common for consumers to have HD televisions in 2006.

Remember when the government set up the Digital TV transition, making all television signals HD compliant?  They set that up in 2005, and had it scheduled for February 2009 because they knew the country wasn't ready yet.

The DTV Delay Act changed the mandatory analog cutoff date to June 12, although stations were permitted to cease analog transmissions before the new mandatory cutoff date. The legislation was enacted on February 4, 2009, and on February 11, 2009, President Barack Obama signed it into law. The purpose of the extension was to help the millions of households who had not been able to get their coupons and converters because demand for coupons exceeded the funding provided for in the initial bill, leaving millions on a waiting list to receive coupons. 


So, even with four years notice that they would either need to get and HDTV or and HD converter, millions of Americans still weren't ready for the switch to HD. I understand with you and your gamer friends, you all probably had widescreen HDTVs in your living room, but many people didn't, and that was only two years ago.

Now, look at what Nintendo hoped to accomplish with the Wii: they wanted it to be really cheap, really easy to use, and approachable to non-gamers and families. The same millions of non-gamers and families that didn't get their HD-shit together for 4 years as recently as 2 years ago. Just because you didn't like it, doesn't mean it didn't make good business sense. It made the system worse, but it didn't affect their success in any way... much like their (basically) lack of an online component. Up until last year, less than 3 of every 4 PS3s were connected to the internet, and the other two systems were lower than that. Go back a year or two, and that percentage drops dramatically.

Now internet and HD are expected, so now they'll be putting them in. Again, it sucks that they aren't being more forward thinking, but those were pretty smart cost-cutting choices.
"
You guys just don't get it. 
 HD is just higher resolutions. It was the next logical step in the evolution of TV. It was going to happen. And it was going to become popular in the mid to late 00's which is exactly what happened but Nintendo's Wii console was not HD ready when it should have been. Why? Because it was going to be a console for the mid to late 00's which was when HD finally became widespread. It should have AT least been HD ready because it released at a time when HD was just about to take off. There are no excuses for Nintendo not including some sort of HD output. 
And like I said earlier, 3D is just a fad. It is NOT the next LOGICAL step in the TV evolution. TV has always been a moving picture set at a certain resolution with those resolutions getting higher and higher as technology got better.

3D is just an expensive UNNECESSARY accessory.  

"
Um... you're agreeing with me... 

The rise of HDTVs among the average consumer occurred during the lifespan of the Wii. Therefore, most people didn't have HDTVs when the Wii was released, but they do now. Nintendo knew this would be the case, and didn't want to waste money at launch on a feature that most people wouldn't be able to take advantage of, even if it was going to become mainstream in the next few years. It was a cost-cutting measure. Now that HD is mainstream, everyone will benefit from it, and thus it's practically a necessity for their next console. We agree on the facts, I was just explaining why they did what they did. Wasting money to benefit a small portion of their userbase wasn't cost-effective, and cost-effectiveness is why Nintendo is as successful and secure as it is.

I agree that 3D is probably a fad and not an inevitability like HD was, but it's not really relevant to this discussion. Nintendo knew HD would inevitably be mainstream, it just wasn't when they launched the Wii.

Look at it this way, we know for a fact that someday we will need cars that don't run on oil. If I had the option of releasing a car that was a oil-run car right now, and pricing it at $25,000 and I would make a profit on every car sold, it would make much more business sense to do that then to release an all-electric car for $50,000 that I was selling at a loss on each car and that most users wouldn't be able to use yet.  They hedged their bets that most people wouldn't care about HD until about the time they were ready to release a new system, and for the most part (when it comes to the average consumer and not "hardcore gamers") they were right. Now regular people are starting to get HDTVs and Blu-Ray players, so now it makes sense to release an HD console, since the technology is practically mandatory and is cheaper to produce.
#96 Posted by robbob88 (326 posts) -
@Wrighteous86 said:
" @robbob88 said:

" You guys just don't get it.  @Wrighteous86 said:

" @robbob88: Nobody said HD didn't exist. By your logic, the PS2 and Xbox were shitty consoles for not having true HD. It wasn't common for consumers to have HD televisions in 2006.

Remember when the government set up the Digital TV transition, making all television signals HD compliant?  They set that up in 2005, and had it scheduled for February 2009 because they knew the country wasn't ready yet.

The DTV Delay Act changed the mandatory analog cutoff date to June 12, although stations were permitted to cease analog transmissions before the new mandatory cutoff date. The legislation was enacted on February 4, 2009, and on February 11, 2009, President Barack Obama signed it into law. The purpose of the extension was to help the millions of households who had not been able to get their coupons and converters because demand for coupons exceeded the funding provided for in the initial bill, leaving millions on a waiting list to receive coupons. 


So, even with four years notice that they would either need to get and HDTV or and HD converter, millions of Americans still weren't ready for the switch to HD. I understand with you and your gamer friends, you all probably had widescreen HDTVs in your living room, but many people didn't, and that was only two years ago.

Now, look at what Nintendo hoped to accomplish with the Wii: they wanted it to be really cheap, really easy to use, and approachable to non-gamers and families. The same millions of non-gamers and families that didn't get their HD-shit together for 4 years as recently as 2 years ago. Just because you didn't like it, doesn't mean it didn't make good business sense. It made the system worse, but it didn't affect their success in any way... much like their (basically) lack of an online component. Up until last year, less than 3 of every 4 PS3s were connected to the internet, and the other two systems were lower than that. Go back a year or two, and that percentage drops dramatically.

Now internet and HD are expected, so now they'll be putting them in. Again, it sucks that they aren't being more forward thinking, but those were pretty smart cost-cutting choices.
"
You guys just don't get it. 
 HD is just higher resolutions. It was the next logical step in the evolution of TV. It was going to happen. And it was going to become popular in the mid to late 00's which is exactly what happened but Nintendo's Wii console was not HD ready when it should have been. Why? Because it was going to be a console for the mid to late 00's which was when HD finally became widespread. It should have AT least been HD ready because it released at a time when HD was just about to take off. There are no excuses for Nintendo not including some sort of HD output. 
And like I said earlier, 3D is just a fad. It is NOT the next LOGICAL step in the TV evolution. TV has always been a moving picture set at a certain resolution with those resolutions getting higher and higher as technology got better.

3D is just an expensive UNNECESSARY accessory.  

"
Um... you're agreeing with me... 
The rise of HDTVs among the average consumer occurred during the lifespan of the Wii. Therefore, most people didn't have HDTVs when the Wii was released, but they do now. Nintendo knew this would be the case, and didn't want to waste money at launch on a feature that most people wouldn't be able to take advantage of, even if it was going to become mainstream in the next few years. It was a cost-cutting measure. Now that HD is mainstream, everyone will benefit from it, and thus it's practically a necessity for their next console. We agree on the facts, I was just explaining why they did what they did. Wasting money to benefit a small portion of their userbase wasn't cost-effective, and cost-effectiveness is why Nintendo is as successful and secure as it is.


I agree that 3D is probably a fad and not an inevitability like HD was, but it's not really relevant to this discussion. Nintendo knew HD would inevitably be mainstream, it just wasn't when they launched the Wii.

They hedged their bets that most people wouldn't care about HD until about the time they were ready to release a new system, and for the most part (when it comes to the average consumer and not "hardcore gamers") they were right. Now regular people are starting to get HDTVs and Blu-Ray players, so now it makes sense to release an HD console, since the technology is practically mandatory and is cheaper to produce. "
Wow. I feel like a fucking dumb shit right now. I should have read your previous comment more clearly. I apologize. 

It's good that we agree though. Haha.
#97 Posted by Wrighteous86 (3782 posts) -
@robbob88: No prob, rob bob!
#98 Edited by mariokart64fan (366 posts) -

very old article , found that out on gamespot along time ago , but since then they said its capable , they just not going to put effort into their titles at the mean time ,

its up to developers to try it out , theres already 3d wii 1` games lol , -i got one of them they come with these blue and red glasses,

so saying wii u isnt 3d capabile is hores #### if the wii 1 is , then t he wii u wis more then likely capable , they just not marketing wii u as a 3d capable machine , for some reason they never did ,

also , id agree on nintendos notion about 3d gaming at least for tvs , these 3d tvs are still to expensive for the average gamer /home owner,

not a big market just yet ,3ds is a entirely different story cause its only 169,99 and no glasses required,

that as we all know got off to a slow start in it self so , itll take time for nintendo them selfs to enter fully 3d , once reg hd tvs are discontinued, and 3d tvs take their prices , that will be when nintendo probably jumps on the bandwagon

#99 Posted by mariokart64fan (366 posts) -

already sorta confirmed by the darksiders 2 release date , summer release is more likely ,

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.