do you think nintendo will be entering next gen first ?

considering they have the lowest hardware specs from all current gen consolesi believe they will have to do the next step first , don't think it's gonna happen before 2012 though but i think they'll be first next gen ,like 360 was this gen

the wii consoles sale pretty good so i think missing capital shouldn't stop them from going to the next level (gen)

Well I think they kinda already have. Seeing as how all the "Nex-Gen" fans think the only thing that make a System nex-gen is HD Graphics with the exact same gameplay, I would say that Nintendo already is in the "Next Nex-Gen" for giving an entirely new way to play games rather than just upping the graphics.

I hope they stay on the down low until the other two release whatever it is they are going to release. I'd hate to see another one of Nintendo's ideas blatantly copied.ZumaJones07

They are probably going to release their next gen console at the same time as their competitors. Rocky32189

[QUOTE="Rocky32189"]They are probably going to release their next gen console at the same time as their competitors. AmnesiaHaze

I hope Nintedo doesn't release the new console too soon because I like this gen.

They will probably anounce there new system at the e3 after one of the others is anounced. But there system will probab;y be pretty hush hush so they don't get copied again.

It's going to be the Nintendo I.

[QUOTE="Rocky32189"]They are probably going to release their next gen console at the same time as their competitors. AmnesiaHaze

whatever it is itll have to be super compatible with the wii, which kinda limits what they can dobobbywinters

Microsoft will probably be first. Sony has already stated that they want the PS3 to last ten years, so if they keep their word, they won't be first. Microsoft can afford to spend a lot more money than Nintendo can when they develop their next console. Also, Microsoft will especially want to release something in Japan as soon as they can because they'll want to make up for the 360's lousy sales there.

Sony has already stated that they want the PS3 to last ten yearsaransom

I don't think so why would they they are in first place and that won't change.

I don't think so why would they they are in first place and that won't change.

Nintendo_Ownes7

[QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"]

I don't think so why would they they are in first place and that won't change.

teknic1200

Longer life span =/= no new systems, first of all. Look at how the PS2 and even the GBA lived on after their successors had arrived. Microsoft and Sony could still very well release a new system during the Xbox 360 and PS3's run and still have those systems around to provide something for developers who won't or can't make the jump to work on.

I agree with Nintendo_Ownes7 in saying that Nintendo is probably the last company that wants this gen to end right now, given the amazing success it has garned in such a short period of time. Yes, it could be possible that they be the first to release a new system, but I wouldn't say that is set in stone. I think within the next year or so, the events that transpire with the Wii will determine how crucial it is for Nintendo to be working on the next system.

[QUOTE="AmnesiaHaze"][QUOTE="Rocky32189"]They are probably going to release their next gen console at the same time as their competitors. Rocky32189

I love when we agree

Nintendo is going to be losing steam by the end of this gen and if they come out with hardware first they're going to be in the same position. Instead they'll release at the same time as at least 1 other console maker and allow the "sticker shock" syndrome to help them with sales.

Nintendo is going to be losing steam by the end of this gen and if they come out with hardware first they're going to be in the same position. Instead they'll release at the same time as at least 1 other console maker and allow the "sticker shock" syndrome to help them with sales.

Jaysonguy

I think they're going to follow Sony's "10 year lifecycle" or at least attempt to. Well actually, if you think about it... Nintendo already has experience with doing so.

The NES was still being manufactured well into the SNES's life. They'll drop a new system when they feel the Wii isn't bringing in what they think is acceptible. It might be selling still, but not at a rate as it once once (like the NES, or PS2).

Longer life span =/= no new systems, first of all. Look at how the PS2 and even the GBA lived on after their successors had arrived. Microsoft and Sony could still very well release a new system during the Xbox 360 and PS3's run and still have those systems around to provide something for developers who won't or can't make the jump to work on.

I agree with Nintendo_Ownes7 in saying that Nintendo is probably the last company that wants this gen to end right now, given the amazing success it has garned in such a short period of time. Yes, it could be possible that they be the first to release a new system, but I wouldn't say that is set in stone. I think within the next year or so, the events that transpire with the Wii will determine how crucial it is for Nintendo to be working on the next system.

Madmangamer364

Yeah people often misunderstand what Sony means about that 10yr lifespan, they mean the consoles will still recieve the minimal support of at least your annaul license games like Madden and Smackdown. MS has no choice but to hold on to that because people will be extremely gunshy about picking up the next MS console early after the failure rate debacle with the 360. However I disagree with the fact that Nintendo wants to hold onto this gen, they have already cashed in and things will only slow down even more than they already are now. The Wii will reach market saturation, and then there is no reason to hold on to it, because revenue from hardware will take a nose dive, and they can make software revenue on a new console. In other words, there is little reason to hang on to a particular generation. Look at some of the major hardware generations; when the NES had 90% of the market, they moved on to the SNES. When the PS2 had 70%, they couldn't wait to get to the PS3. When you are market leader you have brand name recognition, you can get the bulk or your audience to revigorate your hardware revenue as long as you don't do something stupid to drive them away.

What do you think they would rather do, keep selling software for the Wii as hardware numbers continue to dwindle, or make a new console, still make big numbers software wise and make big numbers on hardware. Hell if companies could release a new console every year they would do it, Nintendo has no desire to hold on to this generation like grim death.

I really doubt it. Based on what we have seen so far the Wii could go another two/three years being the market leader so Nintendo clearly has no reason to get the next generation started as soon as possible. The wisest decision, as usual, is to release their next console on the same window as the other two companies.

So as I see it, it is not up to Nintendo to decide when the next generation will begin, but it is up to Sony and Miscrosoft.

However I disagree with the fact that Nintendo wants to hold onto this gen, they have already cashed in and things will only slow down even more than they already are now. The Wii will reach market saturation, and then there is no reason to hold on to it, because revenue from hardware will take a nose dive, and they can make software revenue on a new console. In other words, there is little reason to hang on to a particular generation. Look at some of the major hardware generations; when the NES had 90% of the market, they moved on to the SNES. When the PS2 had 70%, they couldn't wait to get to the PS3. When you are market leader you have brand name recognition, you can get the bulk or your audience to revigorate your hardware revenue as long as you don't do something stupid to drive them away.

What do you think they would rather do, keep selling software for the Wii as hardware numbers continue to dwindle, or make a new console, still make big numbers software wise and make big numbers on hardware. Hell if companies could release a new console every year they would do it, Nintendo has no desire to hold on to this generation like grim death.

Sepewrath

Well, I first think that depends on what exactly the Wii does from this point on. Regardless of what happens from here on out, I agree that this gen has been a major success for Nintendo. Even if by the chance the Xbox 360 or the PS3 manages to surpass the Wii in sales, which appears to be unlikely, Nintendo can still say it's the big winner based on how fast the Wii jumped out of the gate, with Nintendo only gaining massive revenue during it's run. Seeing as how the system hasn't even hit its first major wall yet, I'm not so sure if it's a good idea to suggest that it has reached market saturation and can't remain a top-seller. If the recent surge in Japan is any indication, it would only take a major release or two here and there to boost Wii sales enough to keep it more than relevant. I think Nintendo can manage that much, especially if it can continue to gain support along the lines of Monster Hunter Tri from other publishers, which might be easier to do now.

What I'm saying is why jump ship when you're still doing so well? We both know that a new system doesn't promise success, but rather an increased investment that you have to make into that system and the games for it. And lately, revenue on new hardware has been hard to come by, so that's not even promised anymore. Heck, I'm sure that if they could, Sega would like to still be in the 16-bit era, where the Genesis at least was a popular asset to them, unlike the two systems that followed it. A new system only means you have to come up with a new way of attracting consumers, and it remains to be see if Wii owners will make the transition to Nintendo's new system. Personally, I'd like to think Nintendo will have success in the future, but hey, we've all been down this road before to know that it's not a sure thing.

That's why I think for the moment, it's in Nintendo's best interest to ride this thing out, unless it has something super amazing planned that would ensure success with its next system.

I would think that Microsoft would be the first to put out a new console... then Nintendo and Sony at (practically) the same time like with the Wii and PS3 launches...

hopefully this gen lasts a bit longer.

It is their turn after all... Sony was the first in 2000 with the PS2. GC and Xbox came out in 2001. Microsoft ridiculously came out four years later in 2005 with the Xbox 360 and then PS3 and Wii came out in 2006. So... that means Nintendo will be first this time around, right? Actually, probably not. The Wii is doing great now, much like the PS2 did last generation. I think Nintendo will hold out on a new console as long as they can. That means wait until Microsoft or Sony release the first console and then release a console a year later alongside the remaining company; that's how it's been the last two generations.

I don't really care, as long as the graphics for the Revolution 2 are as good as the PS4 and the X1080 (making these up off the top of my head).

I'm not a graphics wh*re, but I feel really bad when I see games that have as much detail as some on the PS3, then turn on my Wii and start playing any game that isn't Galaxy :(

i think nintendo is already working on their next console it was announced a while back ,

they always work on the successor right after the current ones are done ,

so ya they will be first , because well its already dated , -the hard ware in wii , im willing to bet next gen wont see a graphic boost ,

so wii 2 will have name recignition and the power to compete , so then there wont be any argument whos is what , , ,

i think microsoft will be the first.

they're too much of a wuss to take the risk to release second or last.

they dont think of wii and a competition imo.

mircosoft probably thinks sony would take it's crown back if sony releases it's console first.

Microsoft ridiculously came out four years later in 2005

NormanOfTorn

They were forced to, there's nothing "ridiculous" about it

Name recognition means nothing. As we've seen this generation buyers don't care about the name anymore, if they did we'd see a certain console that's currently last be so far in first place the other two couldn't touch it.

Well I think they kinda already have. Seeing as how all the "Nex-Gen" fans think the only thing that make a System nex-gen is HD Graphics with the exact same gameplay, I would say that Nintendo already is in the "Next Nex-Gen" for giving an entirely new way to play games rather than just upping the graphics.

nini200

Well, I first think that depends on what exactly the Wii does from this point on. Regardless of what happens from here on out, I agree that this gen has been a major success for Nintendo. Even if by the chance the Xbox 360 or the PS3 manages to surpass the Wii in sales, which appears to be unlikely, Nintendo can still say it's the big winner based on how fast the Wii jumped out of the gate, with Nintendo only gaining massive revenue during it's run. Seeing as how the system hasn't even hit its first major wall yet, I'm not so sure if it's a good idea to suggest that it has reached market saturation and can't remain a top-seller. If the recent surge in Japan is any indication, it would only take a major release or two here and there to boost Wii sales enough to keep it more than relevant. I think Nintendo can manage that much, especially if it can continue to gain support along the lines of Monster Hunter Tri from other publishers, which might be easier to do now.

What I'm saying is why jump ship when you're still doing so well? We both know that a new system doesn't promise success, but rather an increased investment that you have to make into that system and the games for it. And lately, revenue on new hardware has been hard to come by, so that's not even promised anymore. Heck, I'm sure that if they could, Sega would like to still be in the 16-bit era, where the Genesis at least was a popular asset to them, unlike the two systems that followed it. A new system only means you have to come up with a new way of attracting consumers, and it remains to be see if Wii owners will make the transition to Nintendo's new system. Personally, I'd like to think Nintendo will have success in the future, but hey, we've all been down this road before to know that it's not a sure thing.

That's why I think for the moment, it's in Nintendo's best interest to ride this thing out, unless it has something super amazing planned that would ensure success with its next system.

Madmangamer364

Of course a new console doesn't automatically mean success, but it has a greater potential for a string of success that the old consoles didn't. You mention the Genesis, well Sega made mistakes that cost them that gen to Nintendo and they moved on. But lets look at a more successful outing, the NES which absolutely dominated, like no one ever has or ever will again. Why do you think Nintendo isn't still producing the NES, because with that domination they were confident that they could sell the SNES and revitalize the hardware market which at somepoint will have to dwindlle. I'm not saying that Nintendo is going to relase thier next console next year, or even announce it next year. But Iwata said it himself, the more and more everyone copies Nintendo with the motion control thing, the less appealing it becomes to the mass market. So Nintendo cant ride the Wii motion control wave forever, they have to move on the next big idea that MS and Sony will claim to have come up with on thier own :P Oh and "Market Saturation" doesn't mean that it will drop from the top spot or suddenly coming to a screeching halt in sales, it just means that record breaking pace we saw it sell at is a thing of the past, it will settle into an average routine, with spikes here and there due to specific software.

In business, confidence is a big deal, you strike while the iron is hot, you don't wait for it to cool and then try to bend it. Why do you think Sony believed they could ride a 600 dollar console to success and 3rd parties believed it as well. While the Wii at a consumer friendly price, they believed it had little chance of success. You can never ensure success, but when you are successful you cant just sit on your hands and wait for the good times to come to a screeching end. You roll one success into the next success, and try and keep a steady rate of it.

And for those saying that Nintendo should and will wait for MS and Sony to dictate the pace, your quite incorrect. The only reason they could do that with the Wii is because they had such a competitive price, and the inside track on the new innovation. I don't expect lightining to strike twice. MS and Sony wont make the mistake of a $800 console, next time prices will be much more competitive. Now what sounds better? Nintendo wait to duke it out them, at a competitive price and those two likely retaining 3rd party superiority, or Nintendo release a new console that price wise is competitive the PS3 and 360, hardware competitive and its new since we all know new is better than old, no matter what?

And for those saying that Nintendo should and will wait for MS and Sony to dictate the pace, your quite incorrect. The only reason they could do that with the Wii is because they had such a competitive price, and the inside track on the new innovation. I don't expect lightining to strike twice. MS and Sony wont make the mistake of a $800 console, next time prices will be much more competitive. Now what sounds better? Nintendo wait to duke it out them, at a competitive price and those two likely retaining 3rd party superiority, or Nintendo release a new console that price wise is competitive the PS3 and 360, hardware competitive and its new since we all know new is better than old, no matter what?

Sepewrath

Wrong

Nintendo has no choice but to let the other companies dictate the pace, they lost their ability to dictate anything when they made the Wii

The Wii's hook wasn't price it was the motion controls. Price has very little to do with all of this. People who buy games spend money and the casuals who play games spend money. The idea that gamers and casuals go to Gamestop with trade ins is false.

Next gen there's going to be more of an even playing field when it comes to all three consoles as far as price but it wont be close when it comes to features

That means that Nintendo can't come out of the gate early because even their next gen console wont match the current gen offerings available today. Nintendo's hope is the casual and that they've done enough to move them up the ladder so when the casual sees that new consoles are out for everyone they want to continue up the ladder with Nintendo. The problem there is that brand recognition doesn't work for the gaming market as we've seen from last gen to this.

Nintendo's only hope is to release at the same time as everyone else and grab a chunk of the gamers they started this generation who aren't ready for other hardware.

Of course a new console doesn't automatically mean success, but it has a greater potential for a string of success that the old consoles didn't. You mention the Genesis, well Sega made mistakes that cost them that gen to Nintendo and they moved on. But lets look at a more successful outing, the NES which absolutely dominated, like no one ever has or ever will again. Why do you think Nintendo isn't still producing the NES, because with that domination they were confident that they could sell the SNES and revitalize the hardware market which at somepoint will have to dwindlle. I'm not saying that Nintendo is going to relase thier next console next year, or even announce it next year. But Iwata said it himself, the more and more everyone copies Nintendo with the motion control thing, the less appealing it becomes to the mass market. So Nintendo cant ride the Wii motion control wave forever, they have to move on the next big idea that MS and Sony will claim to have come up with on thier own :P Oh and "Market Saturation" doesn't mean that it will drop from the top spot or suddenly coming to a screeching halt in sales, it just means that record breaking pace we saw it sell at is a thing of the past, it will settle into an average routine, with spikes here and there due to specific software.

In business, confidence is a big deal, you strike while the iron is hot, you don't wait for it to cool and then try to bend it. Why do you think Sony believed they could ride a 600 dollar console to success and 3rd parties believed it as well. While the Wii at a consumer friendly price, they believed it had little chance of success. You can never ensure success, but when you are successful you cant just sit on your hands and wait for the good times to come to a screeching end. You roll one success into the next success, and try and keep a steady rate of it.

And for those saying that Nintendo should and will wait for MS and Sony to dictate the pace, your quite incorrect. The only reason they could do that with the Wii is because they had such a competitive price, and the inside track on the new innovation. I don't expect lightining to strike twice. MS and Sony wont make the mistake of a $800 console, next time prices will be much more competitive. Now what sounds better? Nintendo wait to duke it out them, at a competitive price and those two likely retaining 3rd party superiority, or Nintendo release a new console that price wise is competitive the PS3 and 360, hardware competitive and its new since we all know new is better than old, no matter what?

Sepewrath

Well, I really can't argue the validity of your point, but I still see a difference in the philosophy of certain things. There's a difference between moving on, waiting, and rushing things, and I think the topic of this discussion focuses more on Nintendo rushing out of this gen because it has found success this time around. Yes, Sega moved on from the Genesis days; it eventually moved itself to the position of a third party publisher. My point there was even though the Genesis didn't end up the number one system, I'm sure the success Sega had at that time was something it wish it could regain. And for all we know, Nintendo could still be making NESs if it had the chance to, as a major reason the SNES was created was because for the first time in its run as a game company, it saw worthy competition from the Genesis that the NES couldn't keep up with. My message is that before everyone starts going "next-gen" all over the place, it's best to see how things truly play out with this group of systems. These days, you never know how long success will stick with you.

For the most part, I agree with your point on confidence, but even that has to be kept within reason. Sony's problem with the PS3 wasn't a lack of confidence, but an arrogance in thinking that people would pay ANY price for its system just because of its name. They failed to see that each gen takes on an identity of its own, and they thought that previous dominance with its last two systems would carry over to its new system and portable counterpart. This is something Nintendo, Sega, and to an extent, even Microsoft have fallen prey to at some point. At the end of the day, all of the confidence in the world won't move systems, but rather the superior business model and products for the time will. If Nintendo believes that it will have that next-gen, then by all means, it reserves the right to make the jump whenever it so chooses. Once again, the Wii's fate has already be set, regardless of what happens this point onward, so it has the luxury of making such a move.

What I'm hoping for, however, is that the Big N doesn't decide that it wants to rush things and make the first move for the sake of it being first. The first one out of the gate is rarely the system that wins the race, and I'm sure Nintendo knows that. Not to mention the fact that it also risks having anymore of its potentially great ideas stolen if the system comes out too quickly. Heck, if Sony could throw in some sort of tilt-functionality with its PS3 controller in such a short amount of time to try to counter the Wii, who knows what last minute adjustments could be made with the newer systems, as well? I agree that better moves will be made by all three companies next gen, and that's why I think it's important to be decisive, but also at least a little patient with the next jump.

It doesnt matter CAUSE THE WORLD WILL XPLODE IN 2012!I hate people who believe that.And I think they will be first, they prob already have some things they only have to put togheter. There's a lot of things that still need to be invented for that kind of console, and they are the only ones who can right now.

I think Nintendo might try their 3 pillar strategy again. They'd release a next-gen console (let's call it the Rev for this post) that is on par with the other two, while still producing the Wii. The Rev would give Nintendo a chunk of the market that MS and Sony are fighting over, while still producing the Wii and making bank off the casual demographic they've already snared.

If price didn't have anything to do with it, Sony would still be market leader. Contrary to what you said name means everything is this business, howvere that doesn't mean you can blow it. Take Nintendo with the N64 the blew thier brand name by scaring off publishers with the expensive catridge, Sony blew thier brand name this gen because of a grand act of hubris. No one said anything about people going to gamestop or anything like that, but if the Wii had dropped at $400 it would be sitting nestled in 3rd place yet again. Will Nintendo make a play as the massive multimedia system which Sony and MS wont give up on, no they wont, like with the Wii they'll dip thier toes in the water, they wont go skinny dipping in it like Sony and Microsoft. Because they will want to keep the price down. they will pass on the extra unecessary bells and whistles for a gaming console. However the tech that powers the PS3 and the 360 is getting cheaper and cheaper by the day so when the next console comes out, Nintendo will be competitive hardware wise, because it can still release at that sub $300 level. And Sony and MS wont make huge jumps because they want to stay competitive price wise. Price will dictate the next gen, so your quite wrong, when you say price doesn't matter, your little straddle the fence there comment about the PS2 to the PS3 proves your theory has zero merit. Sepewrath

Again, price does not matter

If price mattered the Gamecube would have won last gen, instead it came in third place being beaten out by a console that stopped production before it was even halfway done with it's lifecycle

The only thing that the Wii has going for it in the motion will wont be an advantage next gen. On top of that unless Nintendo starts to make friends in the entertainment field it wont have anything other then it's games.

Sony blew their lead because they introduced tech that the world was not ready to adopt as it's mainstream delivery device. It had nothing to do with price

Again, I don't understand why you and others think that price matters in gaming. It's an expernsive hobby that requres money all the time to keep it going.

Price is not an object for most

The PS2 was first out the gate and won by a wide margin,Sepewrath

A small correction. The Dreamcast was the first out of the gate, and it got crushed within less than two years on the market. The system became irrelevant to most people after the PS2 launched.

I'm NOT saying that Nintendo should cling to the Wii as if its life as a company depends on it, but I honestly don't see the harm with Nintendo holding onto the Wii for a while longer if the system is indeed remaining successful. I think it's more a matter of timing and trying to discover when is the best time to make a move. I do agree with your statement on a system needing a "hook" as you call it to stand out as a better sale, and it's usually the first company with such a hook that ends up the victor. I don't think that one should rely on that hook as the only thing it has going for it, though. Fortunately for Nintendo this gen, the Wii had the hook, but it also had the price and games to further compliment that hook, whereas the other systems offered little more than a facelift, various confusing models, and a high price tag in the eyes of many. That being said, we don't know what the hook will be next gen or even how effective it will be, so I'm not going to jump into any major conclusions.

I suppose the best answer I can give right now to all of this is "we'll see." That's really all I have left at this point. lol

At most, Nintendo will release a system that matches 360/PS3 power wise, while focusing on new , funner ways to control video games.

Again, price does not matter

If price mattered the Gamecube would have won last gen, instead it came in third place being beaten out by a console that stopped production before it was even halfway done with it's lifecycle

The only thing that the Wii has going for it in the motion will wont be an advantage next gen. On top of that unless Nintendo starts to make friends in the entertainment field it wont have anything other then it's games.

Sony blew their lead because they introduced tech that the world was not ready to adopt as it's mainstream delivery device. It had nothing to do with price

Again, I don't understand why you and others think that price matters in gaming. It's an expernsive hobby that requres money all the time to keep it going.

Price is not an object for most

Jaysonguy

Obviously price isn't the only factor but it wasn't a factor, why does the PS3 cost $299 now? hmm, oh no answer, I thought so, nuff said. Price is very important, extremely important, if the same PS3 or 360 came out at $250, we might be looking at a different race. Its not the only factor but your are massively unrealistic in your claims that its about as important as the color of the controllers. THAT is something thats not important to most people. People aren't going to pay $700 for a game console, simple as that, no matter what it features. And Nintendo does need to start putting Facebook and Netflix on thier console for it to succeed, I don't see anyone buying the 360 because they can go on Facebook.

@Madmangamer

The point of my whole argument is simple, the Wii wont have any longer of a lifespan than say the GC, success will not change that fact. Nintendo isn't going to go with the Wii for seven years before announcing the next console, because it is market leader. They will move on to the next gen, the same as if they were in last place. Thier not going to hang out and hold back the release of thier new console to give Sony and MS a chance to catch up so they cant steal thier ideas, or for price comparison. Like I said its going to happen anyway, so its pointless, esepcially since Nintendo has always shown the ability to use thier idea's better than the followers.

And yes I said being first isn't a auto win, the 360 and the aforementioned Dreamcast proves that. But the Dreamcast was also a mess in regards to software, getting it one the shelves and so on. A well played early launch like the PS2, will see big sucess, they had the brand name advantage, it had a DVD player and it had an affordable price. You do that and your going to be fine launching first, screw any or all of those up, like the Dreamcast and the first advantage vanishes.

They probably will be the first to enter next gen because with the 360 and the PS3'sHD graphics and now their motion controllers their life span has increased by A LOT. Thus Nintendo will have to make something to top their stuff.