The Virtual Boy was something else
I used it once, went WTF, and never again haha. Red and black wireframe graphics, and the thing had to be sitting on a table haha.
The Virtual Boy was something else
I used it once, went WTF, and never again haha. Red and black wireframe graphics, and the thing had to be sitting on a table haha.
I'll do my best here, but I'll list as many innovations or firsts as I can think of, which Nintendo was involved with.
Pre-NES:
First platformer (Donkey Kong)
Game&Watch
NES Era:
Side-scrolling platformers
D-pad
On board battery save file storage (Legend of Zelda)
POWERGLOVE!!!1 -- it's so bad
The first GameBoy came out in this period
First side-scrolling racing game (Excitebike), which is now a huge genre on Android and iOS
VR in the VirtualBoy (bleh)
SNES Era:
Shoulder buttons
Mode 7 graphics
Nintendo worked with Sony on a CD-Rom expansion, which eventually became the seed for Sony to develop the PlayStation
GameBoy Color and Super GameBoy adapter
N64 Era:
Analogue stick
Vibration feedback
First 3D platformer (Super Mario 64)
First good console FPS (Goldeneye)
Four controller ports
First console to seriously try online (N64 DD)
Software emulators running on console hardware, which would eventually find its way onto the GameCube and the Wii Virtual Console (Goldeneye and Donkey Kong 64)
GameCube era:
Ummm, it's purple?
First 1st-party wireless controller
Nintendo DS, with touch controls
Wii era:
Motion control
WiiU era:
2nd screen for gaming away from the TV (although this is inspired by Sony's Remote Play with PS3/PSP, but it's the first time it has come as part of the package)
Don't forget about the co-processed games starting with (I think) Starfox on the SNES. That was some crazy stuff!
Virtual Boy was a good idea... but the thing gave me splitting headaches after playing it.
Also apparently there was some way to head mount it like the new VR stuff is.
Also Game cube era had a way for you to connect the Advance SP to the system for use in mini games and second screen stuff.
Oh yeah; the FX chip and the GBA link cable.
http://www.polygon.com/2016/5/2/1156...-nx-price-loss
Not surprising, just confirming. Despite the fact that they are their own biggest developer/publisher, they won't take a loss on hardware sales in an effort to increase game sales."We are not thinking of launching the hardware at a loss," said Nintendo president Tatsumi Kimishima during an investor meeting last week. "Selling at a loss at launch would not support the business."
Kimishima added that Nintendo is developing the NX hardware with that mission in mind, suggesting that the company is looking to keep costs down for the console's components and manufacturing process.
Get that weak shit off my track
They really need to figure out what it is they're trying to do. I think that sad part is that now more than ever video game quality is not directly tied to system power and now Nintendo suggests they want to compete on specs. Very strange. They could probably put an iPhone in an Nintendo box and people would buy it... why try to compete with Xbox and Playstation when casual gaming is at its peak?
They have a casual gaming device, it's a 3DS. They've released more games for that than the Wii U by a long shot, and they have already announced that they're going to make more games for iOS/Android (Fire Emblem and Animal Crossing at least).
The Wii U is arguably already a casual game system, but people just end up playing casual games on their iPads. Nintendo has said before that they were surprised by the take rate on tablets, and their technological advancement, and that had a negative result on the Wii U's consumer impression and sales.
So you take one last big shot at the home console market, fire all your guns, and this is pretty likely to be the last generation of traditional home consoles (by the next rev we may be streaming everything directly to the TV, which is already available on Samsungs I believe).
Get that weak shit off my track
Agreed that's what they're doing, but I can't figure out why... when you have a big name in Market A and Market A is doing really well, and when you have a shit name in Market B and lots of people are predicting the end of Market B, why choose that time to asset yourself in Market B instead of focusing all your energy on getting to A before more people become more entrenched. Just doesn't make sense to me. Even Microsoft, one of two players in B wants out, why on earth do you want to get in there? It's like getting helo'd in to the Titanic just as night falls!
Haven't people been saying that the home console market is done for 10+ years now?