The Galactic Arcade [v2]

To put it another way, it's also financially stupid. If the NX is a new handheld, 3DS aaaand "New" 3DS sales would plummit. Seeing how good the 3DSs have done compared to the Wii U, if that does happen, Nintendo would risk bankruptcy...

Serious talky time now:

In all honesty, Nintendo was in a position where wether they mentioned NX or not they would be screwed due to the comment of making some mobile games. If they didn't mention NX then I can assure you that the internet would be full of "NINTENDO IS DOOOOOOOMED!!!" threads and how they are going to go 3rd party, but by announcing the NX they gave confidence that Nintendo isn't going anywhere and instead they are going to keep making gaming systems. Now instead we have "wii u is doooooomed!!!" everywhere again, but hey, at least that's better than the other.

back to regular mode:

I will say that its a bad idea to just wait for the next console to come out before getting a wii u simply because it isn't selling too well. If you want physical games they will be near impossible to find later on. Pikmin 3 is already out of print so the copies out there are the only ones that will exist. So many other games have also gone out of print already. If you're planning to go digital then you can wait.

edit: Just realized something, if the NX was mentioned in response to the mobile thing then it stands to reason that NX would be a handheld in order to prove that they won't leave that market. Also NX won't get actual info until 2016...meaning earliest release will be...2017

Lux wrote:Serious talky time now:

In all honesty, Nintendo was in a position where wether they mentioned NX or not they would be screwed due to the comment of making some mobile games. If they didn't mention NX then I can assure you that the internet would be full of "NINTENDO IS DOOOOOOOMED!!!" threads and how they are going to go 3rd party, but by announcing the NX they gave confidence that Nintendo isn't going anywhere and instead they are going to keep making gaming systems. Now instead we have "wii u is doooooomed!!!" everywhere again, but hey, at least that's better than the other.

People would say "Nintendo is dooooooooooooooooooooomed!!!" no matter what.

they said the NX will have more details next year, and they worded TWO announcements to make it seem like a third console.
I never get these arguments.

In my opinion, the "New" 3DS is to the 3DS as the Game Boy Color was to the Game Boy. I know that sounds stupid, but think of it this way: They've got Xenoblade 3D coming soon, and it's only compatible with the "New" 3DS, and I imagine other games in the near future will be like this too. Then you have games that work much better on the "New" 3DS, like Smash 3D. It reminds me of the Game Boy to GB Color transition (GB games looked a bit better on the Color, while Color games had a bunch of fancy colors, and a few Color games, namely Pokémon Gold and Silver, could still be played on the GB).

I know it's still possible for the NX to be a handheld, especially since the original 3DS came out a while back, and the "New" 3DS hasn't been sold as the next handheld, but I still think it's a bit stupid to announce a new handheld when they can still work with what they've got. It just seems smarter to get a new main console ready first while the current one struggles to keep up. After that's done, then work on replacing the 3DS.

stupidity at it's finest
IT EVEN SAYS THAT IT ISN'T PART OF THE LAW IN THE ARTICLE!!!!!!
the letter in question also pretty much says "don't use the internet because they will be exposed to it" as well.

Spoiler:

                           

Caprizant wrote:I wanted to find an article to back up what I wanted to say about the situation, and instead found an article that says exactly what I wanted to say. :I

Sooo... If I read that right, Nintendo is planning on developing a system similar to Android and iOS, which are for mobile things, and/or planning on, what sounds like a Sony approach to handhelds, making their next handheld (NX?) compatible with the Wii U... Both sound like horrible ideas...

Now if they made a new console with the controller as a new portable handheld system, that might be good, but, again, if I read the article right, they shot that idea down...

So yeah, Nintendo isn't looking very smart to me right now, but I'll wait and see what they actually have before judging them any further.

If anyone can do that sort of thing, I think Nintendo can. They put a lot of care into their stuff.

You read the article wrong. They are not planning on developing a system similar to Android and iOS in that they are for mobile things, but that they come in multiple different form factors that each function on the same architecture.

Basically, the author thinks they're looking to create a variable experience with their systems where they sell various different versions of the same system architecture, each tailored to specific needs. They're already sort-of doing this with the 3DS series, and now it seems they're looking to unify both the 3DS and Wii U functionalities into one interface. Think of the computer market today—desktops, laptops, tablets, 2-in-1s, smartphones, all have their own niche in the marketplace. Nintendo may want to do that with the console market.

It's actually pretty viable when you think about it. One game can be compatible with a variety of different form factors (handheld, mobile, console) without the need to buy a different version of the game for different platforms. It'll make the system attractive to developers (as long as the architecture itself is simple to develop for), and appeal to all different sorts of gamers.

And if you guys're worried that this announcement smells of death for the Wii U, keep in mind that Nintendo is, at its core, a video game company, and will inevitably start developing new systems immediately after release. They just felt now was an appropriate time to acknowledge the system's existence. We're still not getting any information until next year, and by the time it's released, the Wii U will have had a five-year lifetime.

From a business strategy point of view, the NX isn't anything to even worry about, you should worry more about QoL since its a completely different market and everything...

as for romch, your argument is ridiculously flawed. Why don't games make you any of the things you mentioned first? BECAUSE THEY TAKE SKILL AND YEARS OF STUDY TO DO WHILE TO BE A MURDERER YOU ONLY NEED A BLUNT OBJECT AND FORCE!

I disagree with the article, but I also disagree with people who say violent games don't make one violent. Violent media does in fact make people more aggressive, especially younger people who are easily molded. I think rather than threatening parents, they should focus on informing.

According to the Penn and Teller: Bullshit! article on TV Tropes, they actually did a little field examination and gave a kid a gun (at a shooting range, of course). Said kid was awful among other things. (I haven't actually watched P&T:BS!, admittedly. Maybe one day...after I finish Futurama. But I digress.)

More to the point, Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto - the most notable games which I recall as being "murder simulators" - are rated M. Meaning that it is completely the parent's fault - not would they be negligent enough to let the kid go that far, they also got them a game that says on the case "Mature - 17+".

but it depends on the kid's maturity, if they are mature enough to realize the consequence of killing people. then they can play, my best friend has been playing call of duty since he was 7 and has not killed anyone. my autism prevented me from playing when I that age, because I wasn't mature enough.
and I was talking about how the threat holds no water in the eyes of the law, which explicitly states that a kid under 18 can play, not buy, and they are saying they can't play or us the internet AT ALL, which is against the law to restrict things like that in england.

also, there was a comment about this one guy hearing a new story about a GTA player(5 years old) who drove responsibly, never did story missions, and never killed anyone, he was just having fun being the good guy.

Just throwing out my two cents on the matter. Constantly playing a simulator game, even a real life simulator like a flight simulator, can eventually get to people. And for my evidence, I present the deadliest civil aviation accident ever, The Tenerife Airport Disaster, which killed 583 people when two 747s collided on the runway.

The primary cause of the accident lies with the pilot of the KLM jet. He was instructed to taxi to the end of the runway, turn around and wait for a second 747 to clear the runway. Now this pilot had been spending most of his time over the past few months training new pilots in a flight simulator where he doubled both as the instructor and Air Traffic Control. Combined with other pressures at the time, including fog and reaching the end of his permitted flying hours for that month, he started to take off without proper clearance, potentially having already given himself clearance in his head.

While it is debated what exactly was going through the pilot's head (everyone aboard that plane was killed), what happened after he started the take-off roll is not.

Also did someone try to be another mass murderer or something? Is that why we are having this discussion?