Uh ? You can use it on Wii U. The "upgrade fee" is only if you want to play your games using the gamepad.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Nintendo looking for Lead Graphic Engineer for Next-Gen Console SoC in Redmond
- Thread starter BY2K
- Start date
Uh ? You can use it on Wii U. The "upgrade fee" is only if you want to play your games using the gamepad.
Didn't knew that, but this makes it just even more obvious that this is what they will go for, to be honest
ArchedThunder
Banned
Next Nintendo handheld is dumping the 3DS architecture, it likely won't be backwards compatible with anything from the 3DS.
You clearly haven't tried the New 3DS.
Also I agree that the resolution is likely to be ???x480. I'd expect 1600x480 if they do go with 3D again as I expect they will. 1600x480 would double the 3DS resolution and that would be a large leap for a Nintendo handheld.
Not only that but the XL is more likely to be bought by early adopters, is generally the better selling system now and would have a greater potential for profit.
Meaning that an XL sized system is more likely going to be the launch model with smaller, cheaper systems launched afterwards.
Schnozberry
Member
qHD (960x540) screens are also pretty cheap. If they go with clamshell design again, a lower screen at VGA resolution would pair nicely with it.
Ryoma-Echizen
Member
Yeah.
People should stop thinking that more resolution = better graphics, NO
More resolution means more definition and more detail at the cost of more gpu/memory bandwidth work.
It's totally different for video where you have a "perfect" source and the only thing you can improve upon that is how detailed is going to be shown to the end user.
Yeah, this sounds like something Nintendo could do.
I think qHD (960x540) makes more sense, because it's cheaper to get Displays with that resolution, because they are everywhere, and also if you want to make it look like your Games are HD, then qHD is a better choice than 480p.
I wouldn't completly rule out that Nintendo would run with 480p, but, considering their Plans of shared Assets and stuff, it would only be in their own interest to have a Display resolution as closly as possible to the HD-Resolution that the Wii U uses, while being cheap. And once again, qHD is more qualified to fulfill that desires instead of 480p.
ArchedThunder
Banned
Exactly, all that going 720p is going to do is force Nintendo to go for more expensive components. If they go 720p we're likely getting a handheld HD Wii in terms of graphical output so they can keep the costs down.
Fourth Storm
Member
Considering that the 2DS already effectively uses an 800x480 screen, I do feel the next gen handheld will be a bit higher. We're talking two full years from now most likely and 720p will be even cheaper than it is now.
I also think they will have full 3DS BC in there, because it's easy to shrink the CPU/GPU down and include it in the package for little extra cost. Nintendo have always had BC in their handhelds. There's no reason to change that now.
Optimistically, if we are talking late 2016, I think 16nm/14nm might be feasible. In which case I'd see the specs as something like this:
Quad Core: ARM Cortex A57 or a quad core A57/A53 Combo
128-192 AMD GCN2 shader cores
32 MB eSRAM
2-4 GB LPDDR4 @ 12.8-25.6 GB/s
I think Nintendo might experiment with a couple different models: a traditional DS model and also a tablet model that has the dual screen function built into the OS to turn on/off. The dual screen OS toggle will also be available on the home console if one happens to own a portable.
ArchedThunder
Banned
If they want 3DS backwards compatibility the system will probably be over $200, and I doubt they want that after the 3DS.
Fourth Storm
Member
The 3DS price certainly wasn't due to the ARM11 CPU and PICA 200 GPU. They were both pretty mature even back in 2011 and DSP, which is a small company, likely gave Nintendo a great deal. The main component driving up price was/is the screen.
Btw, just read recently that the new 3DS uses a quad core processor. Pretty interesting as the initial rumors suggested a mere overclock. Perhaps Nintendo want some hands-on experience programming for more cores.
Resolution of the past three Nintendo portables:
GBA - 240x160
DS - 256x192
3DS - 400x240 (800x240 utilised for 3D)
4DS - 800x480?
That sort of resolution bump just makes sense for what Nintendo tends to do with their portables. We're all going to be wrong because we aren't privy to what Nintendo want to achieve with their next handheld but I just think 480 makes more sense than 720.
Those bringing up the point of costs may be missing the point a bit.
A 720 screen may be less expensive on its own but would require more processing power and a larger battery to power the system. This would probably cost more than the price difference between the two screen choices.
GBA - 240x160
DS - 256x192
3DS - 400x240 (800x240 utilised for 3D)
4DS - 800x480?
That sort of resolution bump just makes sense for what Nintendo tends to do with their portables. We're all going to be wrong because we aren't privy to what Nintendo want to achieve with their next handheld but I just think 480 makes more sense than 720.
Those bringing up the point of costs may be missing the point a bit.
A 720 screen may be less expensive on its own but would require more processing power and a larger battery to power the system. This would probably cost more than the price difference between the two screen choices.
Those two have the best Chances at being the resolution of thhe next Handheld.
Also i guess the Screen will be at least 5'.
I mean look at the 3DS. It has a Top-Screen-Size of 3'53. Now, look at the average Phone-Screen-Size in the Year it launched (2011):
It's exactly the same size. If they are going to launch their next Handheld in 2016/2017, i think they will try to match avarage Phone-Size again, wich will be at at least 5' by that Time.
I'd be confident in saying that's a coincidence more than anything else. All of Nintendo's previous handheld consoles had larger screens than the average phone, that just happens to be the point where phone screens and Nintendo handheld screens crossed over.
For a different point of view, consider this graph instead:
That's the GBC, GBA, DS and 3DS at their respective launch dates. The trend line indicates a screen of just over 4" in 2017 (although I'd be the first to admit that any forecast based on four data points is little more than a guess).
Edit:
At a guess it's power efficiency/thermal considerations. Four cores at x MHz will use less power and produce less heat than two cores at 2x MHz.
HBM is more power efficient than DDR.
854x480 like the WiiU gamepad would be absolutely sufficient for me for a ~4,5" screen.
Knowing Nintendo this is probably also their most likely choice (it's also a pretty massive upgrade from the 3DS). They could also put in the Gamepad's tech so you could use it instead (like the 3DS for Smash Brothers)
Second that.
I hope for no 3DS BC so they can go back to one screen only, the touch screen is as underutilized as the gamepad, maps and inventory don't justify it IMO, at least we could get a second circle pad instead of a nub, less power consumption, and less cost to produce.
I also think the screen should be between 4,5" and 5", the XL version sell more anyway.
I also think the screen should be between 4,5" and 5", the XL version sell more anyway.
Fourth Storm
Member
Likely true and the extra experience they get is just a beneficial side effect.
True, but it is still higher power overall. It's more efficient for the bandwidth you get with it. DDR using a normal 64 bit bus is going to consume less power.
I'm split on the issue. Yes, it is underutilized. However, the small conveniences such as map and inventory will be sorely missed. It's also been an iconic feature for over a decade that Nintendo may not want to let go. And it helps them stand out against the vast sea of smartphones and tablets. That's why I think they release a traditional DS format portable and also a tablet version that can emulate 2 screens within the large main screen.
KojiKnight
Member
Did I miss where this was announced? Because this is a pretty big deal if true... It doesn't make any sense, however, to do so. ARM are plentiful, ARM are easy to fabricate, ARM are power efficient, and ARM are cheap. Switching away from ARM would most certainly be a mistake for their hand held (BC being just a single part of that).
If they could put both on it I'd be all over that, but if I had to choose one it would be the second circle pad.
Another thing they could ditch is the camera, the only games I can think that use it are Denpa Men and Spirit Camera.
But less power efficient than LPDDR (or mobile-oriented stacked memory like Wide I/O 2), which is what Nintendo would be using in a handheld.
magnumpy
Member
I would expect an x86 processor for their next handheld, as well as their next console. right now they are having a rather large issue due to the fact that basically all games are being developed for x86 processors (PS4 and Xbox1 both use x86 processors, which of course makes releasing a PC version a natural fit). nintendo meanwhile has basically 0 third party support, except for a dwindling number of 3DS titles. third parties would have a much simpler time if all 3 console hardware manufacturers use the same architecture.
Fourth Storm
Member
x86 would be horrendous in a handheld. It just doesn't have the energy efficiency of ARM. Nintendo are going to design an architecture that meets their own needs, as they always do. If the machine ends up being a hit, 3rd parties will be enticed to put some software on the thing. Catering to third party console developers who are heavily invested in AAA 18-35 demographic will get them absolutely nowhere. The philosophies are just too fundamentally different, and it's such a long shot that hardcore gamers would embrace Nintendo en masse that it wouldn't be worth the risk.
Ultimately, whether a machine is ARM or x86 or even IBM is of little importance compared to overall capabilities and, more importantly, sales.
Probably by releasing new AAA games developed specifically for their handheld hardware. I mean DQ8 mobile runs well and is worth playing, especially if you didn't play the original. But the limited controls do hold it back from the original experience. Not sure why Nintendo should be worried about a decent port of a 10 year old game with somewhat awkward controls.
magnumpy
Member
because the world has passed nintendo by. thats why they should be worried. no one cares about nintendo or WiiU except a few hardcore fans, as evidenced by its low sales.
I don't think you know how x86 works if you're suggesting putting it anywhere near a handheld device.
A closed system like the 4DS will be able to far out clip a general purpose port for generic hardware, if Nintendo build it correctly it will have a few years of strength even over multiple hardware iterations of tablets and phones. Moreover, Nintendo would be filling its library with modern AAA titles and a controlled eShop for indies and, preferably, not garbage UI/OS... as well as actual controls.
magnumpy
Member
Intel just ported Android to x86. obviously they see a future in handheld x86.
the issue I'm raising isn't the hardware power. It's compatibility with modern games, which are all being developed to run on x86 devices. if nintendo releases an incompatible device, they'll have the same problem they do now: no third party support.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
The next handheld should have a top screen in 16:9 at either 540p or 480p. It will not have an x86 or x86-64 processor. The best guess is that it will have a ARM Cortex-A53 or A57. It will probably be dual core. It will probably be based on the AMD K12 or one of it's cousins. It will be paired with AMD GPU cores. How many will be based on power draw. Unless batteries have a massive revolution in the next year, that will be the limiting factor.
The next Console will be based on the same CPU and GPU cores - it will just have more of them running at higher speeds.
As far as backwards compatability goes, I suspect that the focus will be on handheld titles. In fact, if the 9th generation Nintendo handheld is backwards compatible with DS, 3DS, and New 3DS titles, I suspect that the 9th generation console will be as well.
I don't know what to expect for backwards compatibility with the Wii U, unless emulating PowerPC in ARM is trivial. I suspect that Nintendo may have painted themselves into a corner on that, and would have to include a Wii U in the 9th generation Nintendo console.
This can be solved in a manner of ways. One of the easiest would be to port the Wii U libraries to ARM and get an almost free greatest hits out of it through recompilation and tweaking. They could even do an upgrade program. Send in your discs for a downloadable copy compatible with your new system for $5 a game.
Wii and GameCube should be something that can be emulated and fall into Virtual Console territory.
I think a key strategy for Nintendo could be to have running compatibility in the future. Let TVs top out at 4k (anything higher is kind of ridiculous outside of a proper movie theater). Let the systems that they put out in 2030 play cartridges from the DS in 2005, and everything in between. If they can run like that, then they should be able to produce newer systems every year or two and abolish the generational cycles.
The hardest part for Nintendo might be NIH syndrome, and this has nothing to do with hardware. I think that they need to be able to bring in technology from the outside. Can they bring in a hypervisor from somewhere else like Xen or SierraVisor? I think they need to be able to not reinvent the wheel. Can they ape online features that Xbox and Playstation gamers take for grated like proper voice chat? Can they bite the bullet and do system wide achievements of some sort?
Whatever hardware they put out, it will play Nintendo games. The bigger issue is about whether their internal politics will let them buy the pieces that they need where they've failed to innovate and/or fallen behind.
The next Console will be based on the same CPU and GPU cores - it will just have more of them running at higher speeds.
As far as backwards compatability goes, I suspect that the focus will be on handheld titles. In fact, if the 9th generation Nintendo handheld is backwards compatible with DS, 3DS, and New 3DS titles, I suspect that the 9th generation console will be as well.
I don't know what to expect for backwards compatibility with the Wii U, unless emulating PowerPC in ARM is trivial. I suspect that Nintendo may have painted themselves into a corner on that, and would have to include a Wii U in the 9th generation Nintendo console.
This can be solved in a manner of ways. One of the easiest would be to port the Wii U libraries to ARM and get an almost free greatest hits out of it through recompilation and tweaking. They could even do an upgrade program. Send in your discs for a downloadable copy compatible with your new system for $5 a game.
Wii and GameCube should be something that can be emulated and fall into Virtual Console territory.
I think a key strategy for Nintendo could be to have running compatibility in the future. Let TVs top out at 4k (anything higher is kind of ridiculous outside of a proper movie theater). Let the systems that they put out in 2030 play cartridges from the DS in 2005, and everything in between. If they can run like that, then they should be able to produce newer systems every year or two and abolish the generational cycles.
The hardest part for Nintendo might be NIH syndrome, and this has nothing to do with hardware. I think that they need to be able to bring in technology from the outside. Can they bring in a hypervisor from somewhere else like Xen or SierraVisor? I think they need to be able to not reinvent the wheel. Can they ape online features that Xbox and Playstation gamers take for grated like proper voice chat? Can they bite the bullet and do system wide achievements of some sort?
Whatever hardware they put out, it will play Nintendo games. The bigger issue is about whether their internal politics will let them buy the pieces that they need where they've failed to innovate and/or fallen behind.
Fourth Storm
Member
This is just not how it works. If you think game developers are investing lots of time with low-level code tailored to a specific CPU these days, you are quite mistaken. It's all about the middleware, which a modern ARM processor would be quite capable of supporting considering all the major players already develop on it with smartphones.
That has nothing to do with x86 (Atom) being an actual good idea for mobile, that has to do with the fact that Intel can't do anything but pack-in x86 because they can't compete with ARM on that front. They are trying to strong arm the market (again).
Intel has every incentive to racket the market with x86 because that's their leading strength. AMD basically can't compete and, at this point isn't even trying, while Intel can't compete with ARM in terms of what makes ARMs chips so good.
Devices being the same architecture means very little. A developer working with a Jaguar x86 APU is not a master of Haswell x86, and no one is actually coding to the metal for the most part. Its all about what's in the rest of the machine.
Moreover, I'd suspect that mobile gaming far, far outstrips PC/Console gaming. (3DS is also ARM.)
magnumpy
Member
but the games are developed for x86 systems. games like Dragon Age Inquisition for example. if nintendo is incompatible with the competing hardware, well let's just say look at WiiU sales and see how that is going.
note that I'm not really talking about portable gaming devices, as I believe they will not be an attractive purchase going forward. everyone already has a cell phone which can play games, run apps, and call people. to roughly quote Basilio, a new portable from nintendo "won't stand a farts chance in the wind."
If the 3DS can still somehow sell units in Japan, a market dominated by phones and where everything else is pretty much dead in the water. Then there is still a market. Its a smaller market than back in the days of the DS, but the market exists. Dedicated hardware, on the go, is still a thing that people buy because it has its advantages over tablets/phones/phablets.
magnumpy
Member
the market for portable gaming devices is in decline. to quote from the NPD thread, "The only thing Nintendo did not explicitly note as going up between their overall software and hardware was Nintendo 3DS hardware. Given they mentioned the Wii U going up by 10%, it's probably a safe bet that it's flat or down."
the market has shrunk and continues to shrink. the market for dedicated portable gaming systems isn't entirely dead, but it's definitely dying.
Fourth Storm
Member
Putting aside your analysis of the handheld market, the way you describe certain hardware as being "compatible" is different from the reality of game development. Is it convenient that Xbone and PS4 share a CPU/GPU architecture? Of course. But they are far from "compatible." Each has a unique SDK with different APIs, debug tools, and etc. Code is still tweaked and recompiled for each system, which is exactly what would happen for Wii U2 software, be it x86 or ARM. The basic issue is if devs can get game code to run without too much trouble. With an ARM64 processor, the answer would seem to be a resounding yes. Hell, even Wii U's CPU with its 15 year old architecture has pulled some surprising results, and those third party dev teams were tiny.
magnumpy
Member
it is easier for third parties to port between x86 devices than it is to port from say x86 and PowerPC. this should be nintendos #1 concern: winning back third parties, making it as simple as possible for developers to port their games to the nintendo platforms. they would do well to have a similar architecture like PS4 and X1.
The whole point of what he said is that the architecture is hardly the relevant point.
And we're not talking about PPC, we're talking about ARM. They do not have to emulate the PS4/X1 at all, no more than the X360/PS3 had to emulate each other... which they didn't. At all.
I don't think you understand how markets work.
There is saturation and the market has shrunk, but given the way you're extrapolating so freely we may as well also say that "based on Japan, console gaming the world over is dead". More to the point, the 3DS is OLD, really, really OLD and isn't actually getting the support it needs. Even for such an old piece of tech facing world wide market saturation after three+ years on the market, its still actually selling and selling "decently".
magnumpy
Member
obviously, being similar in design has helped PS4 and X1. it makes things that much easier on developers. being an entirely different architecture has hurt the WiiU. well a lot of things have hurt WiiU, but you can't tell me the poor HW choices had no effect. something has to be done to ensure their next console will have third party support, and choosing an x86 CPU seems like the correct move. you want to make things as easy as possible for developers.
well, I can't tell the future, but let me make a prediction and say that (at least in the US) hand held gaming systems are dead, killed by smartphones.
The market may shrink but there will always be a spot for dedicated handhelds IMO. Games like DQ8 and titles from smaller or new companies don't do all that well on mobile a lot of the time from what I've seen. Not all devs are going to want to go $1 or freemium just to have a chance to potentially make money.
magnumpy
Member
do you know the sales numbers for DQ8 on mobile? I ask because it is one of the few 100+ hour experiences you can have on mobile, as opposed to Candy Crush or some other rinky dink simple games.
It sold between 10.000 and 50.000 "Copies" on Android. I expect the Numbers being similar on IOS, so it would have been sold around 100.000 times maximum.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Re all the screen res talk - if nintendo are going for portability across their home and handheld (which they say they are), they'd pick a 16x9 handheld screen. That would save them a good deal of UI/viewports re-designing. Now, an aspect ratio does not necesserily tell us what the resolution might be, as pixels don't need to be squared. But if we went for square pixels, I'm thinking a 850x480 screen. 960x540 is another possibility, though that would make 3DS BC trickier (240 -> 480 vs 240 -> 540).
Mannumpy, don't want to single you out - but the argument you are making doesn't make sense at all.
Also, since you are toutering how you're playing all these great ports on your samsung - all of those are ported to ARM, the chipset most of us would agree nintendo will choose for their next platform.
It gives them ds/3ds compatibility and a mature and cheap platform made for mobile but strong enough for consoles.
PS: Pokemon just sold +4 million this month.
No way. x86 is terrible for a handheld.
SDK and API's and good documentation are more important. That was one of the WiiU's biggest problems (no english manuals, poor tech tools).
Also, since you are toutering how you're playing all these great ports on your samsung - all of those are ported to ARM, the chipset most of us would agree nintendo will choose for their next platform.
It gives them ds/3ds compatibility and a mature and cheap platform made for mobile but strong enough for consoles.
By not offering ports but new compelling software.
PS: Pokemon just sold +4 million this month.
Furter declining, possibly - but not dead. And I would argue it can be made more profitable then 3DS due to digital sales and reducing dev costs with the shared platform they are assumingly going to pull.
No, that post was nonsense. It's not true at all.
magnumpy
Member
again I maintain that portable gaming devices are dead, killed by cellphones. why should I buy a second handheld device just for gaming when I've already got a technologically superior handheld device which plays games, and also makes phone calls and 1,000 other things?
again, handheld gaming systems are dead, killed by cellphones. nintendo has an uphill battle convincing people (outside of Japan at least) they need a second portable device that plays games. so I've got a cellphone in one pocket, my keys in a second pocket, my wallet in a third pocket, and a portable gaming device in a fourth pocket? maybe nintendo should start making pants with more pockets.
I'm expecting more or less a handheld Wii u with much lower resolution, some more modern tech too
Hard to say its dead when they're making a lot of money from it...I get where you're coming from but that's actually extrapolation and conjecture, the numbers don't lie and dedicated handheld gaming is down, but far from dead.
Hard to say its dead when they're making a lot of money from it...I get where you're coming from but that's actually extrapolation and conjecture, the numbers don't lie and dedicated handheld gaming is down, but far from dead.
magnumpy
Member
well extrapolation yes, I'm talking about the future which obviously hasn't happened yet. I will say that at the end of 2014 handheld gaming isn't dead, it's dying. I'm talking about a hypothetical "4DS" or the actual "nvidia shield" or the actual "playstation vita." the writing is on the wall, nobody will be carrying around a portable gaming system in their pocket in say 2016. instead they will be carrying around a cellphone, which isn't extrapolation, that has already happened.
So you're saying that in 2016 the 60+ million people who bought handhelds will just give up on these devices and start playing exclusively on mobile? Yeah, no.
Crazy idea time:
With Nintendo moving towards a more central and platform agnostic development platform could we see them license their platform out?
I am thinking in terms of something like a Panasonic Q where a different company could manufacture something like a Smart TV, media box or even a phone and license out the Nintendo platform to have it built in.
There is still the risk of cannibalizing their own devices but it could prove to be lucrative and it keeps the advantages of be a hardware manufacturer whilst possibly expanding their user base?
With Nintendo moving towards a more central and platform agnostic development platform could we see them license their platform out?
I am thinking in terms of something like a Panasonic Q where a different company could manufacture something like a Smart TV, media box or even a phone and license out the Nintendo platform to have it built in.
There is still the risk of cannibalizing their own devices but it could prove to be lucrative and it keeps the advantages of be a hardware manufacturer whilst possibly expanding their user base?
IMO, they should've done that from the very start, like Sony did with PS4.
They do that since the N64, only the handhelds are completely designed in Japan.
TheMoon
Member
Yup, this idea that Nintendo designs its hardware in a dark chamber beneath Kyoto, completely secluded and ignorant of everything else is complete nonsense.
Factor 5 was heavily involved in the design of the Gamecube hardware which Julian Eggebrecht talked about extensively a few months ago on the IGN Nintendo podcast, Silicon Graphics was famously involved in the N64 creation. Plus, NTD in Washington was also always part of the process.
The only difference is that they don't have an American industry darling headlining their hardware design to parade them around.