+John Butch COD isn't aimed at older adults, it's aimed at teenagers and youngish adults. I guess it's the same for Battlefield?

+John Butch I guess that's it's really only the adolescent market that buys the myth that greater technological capabilities necessarily make games better. Probably why special effects driven summer blockbuster films strive for PG-13 ratings over PG or R. Meanwhile, more experienced and jaded adults are growing both more nostalgic for their childhoods and growing more appreciative of games that focus on personality, atmosphere, art direction and unique game design.

+IwantaPlayStation4 omg I literally bought x,y back in 2012 and got the same feeling. I played for a few hours and put it down for 4 years. Recently all this nostalgia just came back and I'm super addicted to it. Definitely worth playing xy they are so improved and very well done. Even the story line explores darker themes than I remember. It's way easier as an adult to appreciate quality. Even if the story is too childish for some the underlying game is still very fleshed out. Battles are a joy to look at and the online component makes u feel part of a giant world (though it could be much more expanded).

I just broke out my old GBA + Poke Leafgreen. Good memories! All hail the original 150! I want more. ...not more and more irrelevant pokemon, but more design and creativity with the originals. Better graphics on the same old concept would be great! ('Also been playing Pokemon XD and it's concept and graphics are great, but I don't recognize 80% of the pokemon) :(

+sportscardude Hey man add me on Facebook kie connor and message me!

But then again the switch uses a tegra cpu same as the NVidia shield

The Switch is portable. Its direct competition would be Xcloud

a good business is when shit product still sells well, never using sales as benchmark because there are many retarded human

@@Schnitzeldawg Those tegra SOCs are not that powerful also the GPU is very old

@@diegofrgcand its also a home console so it competitors are also microsoft and sony

thats bad excuse making nintendo get away with it, try zelda botw in emulator pc at least 1080p 60 fps, wasted potential

@@richard35791 Do u will pay 500$-700$ for the Nintendo Switch if it was able to do that?

@@framedthunder6436 I'd bet he wouldn't

Botw looks like ass. So do basically all the pokemon games. I don't even know if it's hardware issue but they don't look good.

Why say this years later?

Ventilatingyes The Sega Master System proudly claimed "Now There Are No Limits." Doesn't always mean it's true. ;)

AdamKoralik What about facts? ;) N64 had lots of games that was impossible to port to PS1 due to slow GPU speed and RAM size. This is why the big bunch of FPS also were N64 exclusive. Turok 2, Conkers Bad fur Day, Perfect Dark, Top Gear Overdrive and lots of others looks far better on N64 than any full 3D game ever made on PS1.

Ventilatingyes It's quite simple. The N64 could do things the other fifth generation hardware couldn't do. But, the Saturn, PS1, etcetera could all do things the N64 couldn't. All stems from the moronic decision to use cartridges. In other words, there was no console in the fifth generation that was "the most powerful." It's hard for anyone to take that title when all of the others can do things the others can not.

AdamKoralik : Hardware benchmark is not measured by storage space. But yes, all consoles had their advantages overall. CD/DVD/Blu-Ray did never make any GPU and CPU powerful thou. There was good 2 reasons why Nintendo went with carts. - FMV was overused for years already on CDTV, CD32, CDTV, Jaguar CD etc. and was already boring to people before PS1 was ever launched. - CD's had very slow loading times and carts was many times faster. F-Zero X N64 still holds the record of the fastest booting 3D game ever made, and its maybe the only console game in 1990's that runs at 60 fps. If you remove FMV from over 90% of PS1 games, they would all fit on N64 carts. Its already been proven many years ago in the homebrew scene. I own both PS1 and N64 btw..Even the first CD consoles like CD32 and CDTV.

Ventilatingyes My point is that their format of choice cost them technical advantages. Which is a demonstrable fact.

And it runs 1080p 60fps something which...... Other consoles can't achieve

Ramit Manhas Well, those games on "other consoles" you're comparing to Mario Kart 8 are completely more complex - which the Wii U couldn't come near to achieving.

MightyKrizpp Those consoles are much more powerful, I'll admit that, but they don't use all of their power. Wii U games like Mario Kart 8 actually manages to achieve this since they are optimized for the console. It's not necessarily the consoles' fault, which I forgot to clarify (sorry about that), it's the developers who don't want to push those consoles to their limits due to their complexity. Those games that are on other consoles also released on last gen consoles and looked fine and ran fine on those. If the PS3 and Xbox 360 can run them, so can the Wii U. However, I still believe that the PS4 and Xbox One could run Mario Kart 8 just as well, if not better than the Wii U (Even though that's never going to happen).

Smartie 9000 It actually runs at 720p natively. It's only upscaled to 1080p, but you are correct that it runs at 60fps. Either way, it does indeed look beautiful. I just wish they could have used antialiasing to get rid of all the jaggies.

Sorry, my mistake, I did not know that it was an upscaled resolution. The anti aliasing might have to do with the less powerful GPU or less memory for the RAM. I would like to see it improved too, but not at the risk of the textures of the game or the framerate dropping. Perhaps Nintendo will update it in a patch, if not, not a huge loss since the game still looks absolutely beautiful and runs wonderfully.

Samantha Fox Thay was nicely put!!!

Thank you very much ^

3 years? I've had my ps3 for a solid, solid 7 years now and aside from stopped dev support for new titles JUST to push PS Plus and PS4 onto people, it's hardware is no less than the newer gen. Wii matching the PS3? Yeano....

So, you're saying that every new iteration of a particular company's system must support backwards compatibility through hardware and not software emulation. I don't think you realize how BIG of a request that is. I don't think you understand how these systems work on a base level and for that, your argument is infinitely flawed. Almost every new iteration of a console is based on a new architecture and completely different hardware. This means that for them to support older systems natively, they must also include the same hardware that was present in those systems. You can't simply run games from an older generation on different hardware without emulation, because the system wouldn't know what to do with the game. That would be like trying to speak a different language to someone who doesn't understand and expecting them to anyway. When systems start to get into multiple generations of their product, do you really think it's a good idea for them to build the hardware to accommodate every system they've made since they started? Do you realize that the PS3 Phat was a HUGE brick and costed and astronomical amount because it literally had the hardware for the PS1, PS2 and PS3 all in the same system? Now imagine if they had done the same thing for the PS4. I hope you have a fuck pile of real estate on your entertainment stand, because that would be one hell of a machine and as far as that nice price that they put on that system, well fucking forget that. The PS1234 would have cost at least a grand, not to mention the fact that they would have to source parts from decades ago that are no longer in production to make it. The only way that Nintendo managed to get away from this was that they built the Gamecube, Wii and the Wii U off of the same architecture. They just upgraded it slightly through the iterations to make it better. That let them have the backwards compatibility, while still maintaining a decent size and price and look where that got them. They are constantly bashed for having inferior hardware and being behind the curve. My last point is to argue your assumption that they should continue to support legacy hardware. This is just an absurd request. Hardware keeps moving forward. That's the point I've been trying to make this whole post. New stuff comes out and the old just doesn't get made anymore because it's inferior. Nobody is buying it. There's no money to be made producing this stuff. That's why the prices go up for older games and hardware. Nobody is artificially driving the prices here, it's expensive because it's rare and you're buying it second hand. It isn't being made anymore.

Black River what's the point the norm one is the same

DFG Music And without modern hardware that is up to snuff with developers expectations, they won't get many of those gameplay experiences the PS4, Xbone and PC will have. My best case in point: Battlefield 3/4. The Wii U does not have the CPU GFLOPS to run a game of that kind of caliber without severe and I mean SEVERE reductions to the core game like reduced player counts, physics, animation, and level destructibility. Like many others say, Nintendo designs systems for them, not for their 3rd parties. I think it's starting to become just way too brutally apparent to Nintendo that 3rd party support highly extends your system's potential market longevity. The Wii U 2 or whatever it will be called needs to be within some kind of ear shot of the PS4 or Xbone in order to attract 3rd parties. That means an x86 processor, 8+ Gigs of RAM and enough graphics compute units to compete with the new systems. AMD's Zen microarchitecture will be dropping by the end of 2016, and that correlates well with a Wii U successor in 2017. Also, there will likely be Zen APUs with HBM2 capability, and it's possible Nintendo might exploit it much like how every Nintendo system has some special memory setup.

***** Realistic graphics often needs to go hand in hand with realistic gameplay in order to better accentuate the gameplay and the feeling of one being absorbed in it. But you can still have a stylized game that requires alot of processing power depending on what you are trying to accomplish in terms of gameplay experience. BF3 and 4 are actually incredibly impressive games when you consider all the things that are going on at once in 64 players matches on the PC and to a similar extent the console versions as well which are intensely processor constrained by their hardware, even the PS4 and Xbone. The ability to destroy parts of buildings, and in some cases entire buildings is an incredibly important part of the gameplay since you can engage enemies by blowing out part of a wall or even collapsing an entire building on top of an unsuspecting player. Also both games have simulated gun ballistics, so you have to account for gravity when aiming long distances, and to a lesser extent material penetration of walls and fences is simulated as well. Once again, these are gameplay essentials that add to the richness of the experience and build upon what has been introduced in previous Battlefield titles. Calculating just all that at once takes ALOT of processing power, especially in the form of GFLOPS, something the Wii U doesn't have enough of to provide the same kind of experience as on even the PS3 or Xbox 360. GFLOPS stand for Giga Floating Operations Per Second, an important metric for gauging a processors ability to handle floating point and SIMD operations via it's FPU/SIMD array which are essential for processes that require alot of number crunching like physics, animation, and sound decode. Throw those processes on top of integer processes like AI, memory management, game code execution and draw calls and then you have a better idea of what game development is really like. The PS3 and 360 have entirely impressed me with how well they've managed to surprise gamers over the years, and even more so the developers who poured so much time and sweat into creating some really awesome games that really pushed the hardware, as both systems really forced developers to find solutions to make their projects work on both systems. The fact that Nintendo had the gall to release such a weak system 6 years after the release of the PS3 goes to show that they really don't care about the 3rd party devs or were too overconfident about winning over mainstream and casual gamers a second time. In complete honesty, I loved the Wiimote for FPSs on the Wii, but it's a damn shame that Ninty recycled the Gamecube's CPU and GPU. Even if it had managed to have half the power of a 360, so many of those great 360, PS3, and PC games could've actually made it to the Wii for me to enjoy with Wiimote. Goddamn BF2 or 2142 would've been so cool with those controls.

Blitzvogel Mobius I strongly disagree. better graphics is only necessary when you are re-pasting the exact same game under a different skin. (All FPS games). Nintendo is actually innovative, and invents completely new games every time, not just "what different environments can we get people to shoot each other in?"

DFG Music Nintendo has been pretty innovative in the past. But these days, Nintendo acts like a stubborn old man while everyone is moving on to newer and bigger things (dubious business practices aside). What are some of these "completely new games" you speak of? In the end, all your arguments are refuted by the current market statistics. It's taken them 3 years to sell 10 million units, which is horrible. The market doesn't lie so obviously Nintendo is doing something wrong to attract buyers.

Blitzvogel Mobius Yes. A lot of people like yourself care about graphics over gameplay. That's why the Nintendo is failing. All I'm saying is I disagree with that logic, but nonetheless it still takes up the majority of the consumers.

Thanks for watching!

haha yeah. I always tell people Nintendo are like the disney of video games. I play on ps too. I like having my gran torismo and mario kart. or battlefield and splatoon. I cant live without Nintendo there nor the other consoles. I like the diversty. Without Nintendo or ps or xbox Id be too limited.

They definitely are in terms of how scummy the company is towards the fans

***** Mobile Gaming is dead, It will most likely be Nintendo vs PC but PC has the upper hand.

IGs Zone we can argue power is not the question here.....

+IGs Zone nintendo is doing projects for mobile so maybe they'll be both console and mobiles.

Core games don't work on mobile. All you'll get is fee-to-pay skinner boxes. If Nintendo isn't designing their next console for VR I don't see how the can get back from that. VR is finally here; it's been obvious since the 1980's that VR would win over traditional displays and that time is finally here. All the ingredients exist; small displays that run at >90 FPS, weigh almost nothing and have excellent resolution and negligible latency; sufficuent rendering hardware to run interesting experiences; accurate motion controls tracked in 6 DOF at sub mm precision; dirt cheap sensors by the hundreds. It used to be the case that it would cost tens of thousands of dollars just to make a system that would show the potential of VR, but now it is prime time for real.

+Edwin Contreras I bet PC will prevail, like always....

I'd say it was more like having a Ferrari with no gas tank. N64 had an engine, but it had nothing to put in it.

Whether they did or not isn't the point. You have claimed they haven't apart from the SNES.

edilcanidal My point, that perhaps was unclear, was that Nintendo has never tried to make the most definitively powerful console in a generation, and they have not.

***** PC whit all emulation in hd xD

***** actually the PS2 wasn't that far behind, being that it had online, and a built in DVD player. it was quite advanced to an extent, that being another reason it sold more

Adam Koralik so glad you were right! 2018 and the switch is killin it

GameCube was Nintendo's best console

@@EpsiIonEagle not for Nintendo

@@diegofrgc Yup, and look what happened. Gimmicks galore

​@@EpsiIonEagle As if Nintendo hasn't been interested in gimmicks like the Cd add-ons for the Famicom Disk System, the canceled Super Famicom CD-ROM Adapter, and Japan only Nintendo 64 Disk Drive. Rob the Robot being a gimmick for the NES as a toy in the US. The idea of 3d/vr tech in the Famicom 3d, Virtual Boy, and the canceled Gamecube add-on. Nintendo had always been known for innovation and without them we wouldn't have things we expect like the rumble controller, a dpad, and shoulder buttons just to name a few.

@@hideofreakingkojima5457 Hey, show some respect! R.O.B. is a godamn hero! I hope my children can be half the machine he is.

Thanks.

Mario Suriel 2017

Mario Suriel Adam the Oracle.

+Adam Koralik Wow your predictions in 14:35 just came true!

Except ps5 being a streaming box

Thanks Brian! :P

Thanks.

Hardware though can make better games that can look better and give you more features (bigger scenarios,complex environments,etc) an example would be a game like Ghost Recon wouldn't be able to run a decent framerate unless you strip a lot of things from the game or you have a very good porting team (which a part from Rockstar I don't see another company pull it off)

what justaguy said, and lack of proper or competitive hardware makes game developers want to go sell to other parties where their games arent limited

So you are saying that you wouldn't like all those things with good graphics? They arn't an exclusive thing you can have it all.

The thing is, better hardware allows developers to produce something better, and let the player play the game "more properly". Not that a good game can be done with less hardware (for example, Tetris is totally better than Superman 64), but that goes for what the developer can make. Being your own limit is better than being limited by the tools you use. To say something, the Snes had some problems when making sprites; they had to be squares, 32x32, 16x16, you name it, but in the Sega Genesis, you could have some wild combinations, like 8x32, 32x16, etc. While on the other hand, a bad processor can make your game run too slow to actually enjoy it. Hardware IS an important point.

And Shigeru Miyamoto and Gunpei Yokoi and the rest of them would concur.

+Sacha Turkot Thanks!

XBox.

AdamKoralik They could produce roughly the same visuals (I think the GC was slightly better though). Xbox and GameCube were like P$4 and Xbox1 today. So your theory on Nintendo making outdated hardware since forever is still flawed (not to mention the "N64 vs PS1" era).

Bloody Davey Visuals sure, maybe. But storage medium, HD capabilities, etcetera. These are all factors. As for the other one, I've answered that like a thousand times in the comments already. Short version, the N64's use of cartridges held it back to the point where its technical advances meant dick.

AdamKoralik Yes they're all factors but it all boils down to graphics these days. Internet is overloaded of people arguing about 60fps here, 40fps there, 1080p, 720p (like if they could tell the difference). And yes the use of cartridges severely injured the N64, but just because software houses wanted to work with this new amazing CD technology (and fill their games with horrible loading times, apparently), but you can't say the N64 was outdated. It was quite the opposite.

***** the gamecube is still my favourite console right above the wiiu and ps2, such a good library, Animal Crossing, Path of Radiance, Baten Kaitos, Tales of Symphonia, Smash Bros Melee, Killer 7, Eternal Darkness, Mario Kart Double Dash the list just goes on, and I remember how it always saddened me when gamecube games were so limited and hard to find in stores compared to ps2 and Xbox even though it was that current era. whenever anyone speaks down on the gamecube I want to smack them so hard lol ^^

Yes indeed the cartridges massively limited the N64 load times :)

Mighty Poo Of course there were no load times, it's a cartridge. That doesn't mean the cartridge suddenly is capable of superior performance or storage. It just means you didn't have to wait an extra few seconds.

Alan Cube The max was around 128 MBs. Only a handful used it, and they were so expensive to produce, even at full retail price Nintendo lost money on each unit. In the end, the use of cartridges were a horrendous idea. Not only because they limited what the console was capable of, but because it caused third party developers to bail on Nintendo.

AdamKoralik those extra seconds pisses the hell outta me, and so do the need for memory cards on those damn cds

Tony Jn You're thinking about it from the perspective of a customer. That has very little to do with what's under the hood of the console.

Mario Revuelta And still got dominated by the PS1. CDs > Cartridges in terms of space.

AdamKoralik The NES, the SNES, the N64, well pretty much every single Nintendo console, until the Wii, was actually the most powerful system of their console gens, the only thing that hurt Nintendo in those days was that they refused to move into industry standard storage, such as sticking to carts during the N64, and going for the Mini disks during the Gamecube. Also with the SNES the CPU might have been slower than the Sega Genesis, however the GPU, and Audio processor were more powerful than the Genesis.

***** Sega Master System... XBox... And you ignore how much cartridges crippled the N64.

AdamKoralik I did mention the cartridge disabling the N64 and as far as the Sega master system goes that was due to it coming out after the NES and advantages in technology over time, same with the Xbox, that was just tech being more advanced and less expensive over time.

***** Yeah, you did. My bad. Sorry, I'm operating on very little sleep at the moment.

I don't usually say this but...LOL.

YOU WILL BE THE FIRST OF OUR DARK HARVEST

What, you gonna beat me to death with your Wii controller? You know they're not real nunchucks, right?

ever heard of a joke?

The wii stands up right, you aren't resting shit on in.

Thanks!

Bunch of what?

+flameace50 So do I, (But that's our little secret)

I love you so much, just want you to know that.

The N64 had the amazing games that even with its cartridge limit seemed huge. It was better than Ps1, but not as good as the PS2, which is understandable seeing as there is a 2-3 years difference between them all in development time.

The N64 actually had Z-buffer for perspective correction of textures which I think makes the graphics look way more presentable. The PS1 had no such thing and had jittery textures as a result.

gold lightning Trying to say the N64 is weaker than Ps1 is lunacy. Bad with textures? That was the 5th generation, and the N64 at least had a Z-buffer and texture filtering, which was huge. Slow RAM? Compared to what? It had 4mb's standard and had 8 with the expansion pak. As for gamecube, yeah Xbox aand GC traded blows. Where I feel GC gets the edge though is loading times, which were blazing fast on the cube.

"Slow RAM? Compared to what? It had 4mb's standard and had 8 with the expansion pak." You acknowledged the speed point but then countered it with the AMOUNT of ram it had....not it's speed. And no I've no idea of memory speeds so can't confirm if he is right was just pointing out your mistake

Innovation and economic realities don't always align. While Nintendo certainly has no desire to drop the gamepad, their desire to not lose money may outweigh that.

Nintendo is just like that though. They want to do something that can work until it does. Look at the normal Wii, They had a clear chance to opt out of motion controls and go to the GC ports on the top to get people to be more interested, but they didn't because they wanted innovation. Yes you could Argue that the Wii was very successful for how small Nintendo is right now; but it's the principal of how they always were.

Thehunterpwn The Wii was a financial hit right out of the gate, going on to sell a hundred million plus units. Why would they opt out of that kind of financial success? The Wii U is NOT financially successful, despite how much I love it. Don't be the least bit surprised if they cut their losses and treat the console like a salvage operation, the way Sony did with the PS3.

you can also argue with the release of the 2DS that Nintendo has cut some of its innovative actions, but Look at what they have done in their past. They have gutted their machines to get more revenue. I.E. NES model 2 beings slightly weaker with its picture, the SNES model 2, and the Mini Wii dropping its GC support. The 2DS gutting its 3D gameplay was just something they did to boost their interest in the console and thereby its revenue. They even directed the new Remodeled 2DS towards kids making me see that the Mini Wii was also directed there too, and even making me think that's exaclty what they did with the NES 2 and SNES 2.

True it was a financial success, but I've seen many a time where it's the driving factor in people not liking it. They could have easily gotten the normal controller and raked those that were sceptical.

I agree completely.

i almost forgot they were i card company

The Roman Empire lasted 500 years and yet it fell. No one is safe.

PS1 was still better though.

It'sMyBirthday in sales yes

Game sales took a huge beating due to the massive piracy market for ps1 games. Not so much for n64 games.

actually N64 is pretty weak and the ports are awful and has a small library and the controller is actually super shitty imo

It'sMyBirthday the ps1 was less powerful just that the n64 used cartridges

As far as the next XBOX, I think it'll be integrated into PCs and basically just disappear. some 3rd party manufacturers may release things like the steam box, but that run Windows and auto launch the XBOX app on boot but I don't think MS will keep making new consoles.

The Wii remotes were a poorly conceived idea in general, but "not working" I don't fully believe, they work as well as they were designed to, they're just crappy. Looking at that generations issues though, at least the system wasn't nearly guaranteed to fail after a few months like the first model of the 360. I'd say the ps3 was pretty reliable other than overheating a lot after a year or two. Current gen though, the Wii U Gamepad can have some connection issues but that's usually just if there's crap left on or immediately around the console, but it was far more stable as a whole than the XBOX One or the PS4 at launch.

@@ScottBarrett I agree with this idea, but because of consumer habit, it might take another console generation before it becomes true. For 40 years, people go to the store, buy a console, put games in it and play. Old habits die hard. Whether the successor is purely software, or a small hardware add-on/in for a PC, the dedicated X-Box console is probably a dying thing.

do you got a po box were I can send you cool shit at?

***** I do not. You don't have to send me stuff bro. Thank you though.

***** ill take your cool shit

I was going to send him an rf cable for gc ps2 and xbox as a joke =b

***** Ha, you can keep that.

I do.

I can tell, by the way this is the video that won me over to sub to you. Keep Rocking on man.

DOKU Fox Thank you sir.

XInfinity2013 1: they have cod on the wii u. 2: you are ignoring the other 2nd party and 3rd party games : 3 the games from nintendo is rated much higher than cod or bf is! 4: the wii u is very cheap and is getting cheaper as we speak. or you can get a pre owned wii u and just save yourself about 70-100$.... you know what you must do now right ? now you must get a wii u because i debunked all your opinions. have fun!

XInfinity2013 then you sir are damaged psychologically!

MrScrotumz Thanks for watching!

Gunpei Yokoi actually used the phrase "lateral thinking with withered technology"

The storage format was not all that limiting in terms of the performance of the system in running games. What it meant though was that it made it more difficult for developers to create/port games for Nintendo N64 and Gamecube, and so they lost a lot of 3rd party support. so they had fewer games. Nintendo began focusing mainly on the 1st party games, a trend that became stronger with the N64 and continues to today. The Wii, being underpowered and motion oriented, many 3rd parties were turned off by it. Now with the U, its an issue of the gamepad and units sold.

***** yes it did... But it was mostly shovel ware and shitty ports. Developers trying to cash in on the success of the motion control gimmick.

***** that does seem to be it's achilles heel. The cartridge issue wasn't anywhere near as big a problem as the texture cache. Ironically, independent estimates from homebrew devs suggest Nintendo was forcing even worse limits by insisting devs used 'high quality' microcode for the gpu, which was a set of low level code better suited to high quality pre-rendered scenes than games... (remember the N64 design derives from SGI workstations that at the time were often used to render 3d graphics for films). There was also a 'fast' renderer, which by some accounts could manage 700,000+ polygons (easily beating a ps1 by most estimates), but nintendo wouldn't let anyone use it. Aside from these two included sets of microcode for the graphics chip, it was also possible to write custom micro-code. And that's exactly what most of the more graphically impressive gamee made towards the end of the system's life did... Once again though, nintendo made life difficult for 3rd parties by refusing to provide any documentation about the microcode... So lots of things were done that needlessly hamstrung performance... And of course that insane 4kb texture cache... Thungs would probably have looked vastly different if they had fixed that one specific insane bottleneck, even if they had left every other limit in place... (the often cited cartridge problem is not such a clear disadvantage by comparison. After all, it had some clear advantages over CD's that are still apparent even today, not just disadvantages... And it seems to have been one such advantage that made it plausible to work around the 4kb limit...)

***** You're right. That would've helped a lot early on. And providing proper documentation for the microcode would've helped for more advanced developers. The 4kb issue is a hardware design fault which is hard to fix after the fact , but the rest was stuff they could've easily changed at any time...

+John DiLoreto I may be wrong, but I think what he means is that it started and popularized the idea of adding additional processing power onboard the game cartridge, making it possible for the SNES to do things it could have never done before on it's own. It was such a hit with consumers it, as a result, became a popular idea with developers. Look at the library of games prior to Star Fox and then look at the library after. We had some stunning games come out that I don't think we would have ever been able to experience had Star Fox and it's SFX chip had been a commercial failure. At least, that's what I think, and gathered by it being in Joe's list above. Just to support this, I looked up Virtua Racing since I am not familiar with it's history. Indeed it too used an onboard processor like Star Fox and came out a year later. This stands to support that Star Fox was a defining game when Nintendo's competition started doing the same thing after Star Fox came out.

+Joseph Lathrop I don't think that this video was arguing that Nintendo never cared about hardware or graphics hardware capabilities, I think that it was arguing that they never prioritized hardware capabilities over affordability, their goal was never simply to be the most technologically advanced of each generation. Nintendo has always provided more powerful hardware each generation ... relative to their previous releases. Their focus has always been on designing devices that balance power and price, also balancing risk taking and risk reduction. Unlike Sony and Microsoft, they have never sold a console for less than it cost to manufacture just for the sake of having the most powerful console out on the market faster than the competition, and they have never rushed hardware out on the market with known design flaws just for the sake of securing a user base. They have focused, predominantly, on a more sustainable, conservative business model than their competitors, who think more like Silicon Valley Tech companies, treating their industry like a perpetual bubble market, racing to get new products to market before the bubble burst (and in many ways, actively contributing to making it a bubble). They have had failures in the past, but given their focus on sustainability, none of their failures had significantly hurt them.

+Joseph Lathrop xenoblade chronicles on Wii for me

+Felix Jones That's why people still talk about Pitfall II right?

***** Yup.

thomas little Thanks for watching!

Not in the case of the Super Nintendo. The system was designed primarily for aesthetics, great color/graphics and versatile sampled sound but let everything else to fall to the wayside technically.

Retro Soul what is everything else? The only other thing it needs is great games, which the snes most definitely has

Fanboy spotted. I don't even own a modern console and can smell that BS from a mile away lmao

@@retrosoul8770 The SNES was just even with the Mega Drive. They're both graphically impressive with the SNES's colors, and the Mega Drive's 3D graphics and resolution.

Stoop, of course the Snes has great games but I'm not talking about the games themselves, I'm referring strictly to hardware capability. Nintendo prioritized gfx & sound and didn't give 2 cents over performance (how well games actually played) and it shows when you play MMX, Contra, Gradius, Castlevania, Super M, Chrono T etc. and you're hit with slowdown (when barely anything is happening), or you play Final Fight and there's barely any characters on screen at once (maybe like 3 or 4 max with mediocre animation?) Developers were forced to optimize and program around the Snes's sail level performance to get games running decently, enough for ppl not to notice, and yeah they obviously succeeded because people are blind to its hardware handicap. And Tonny yeah, you could very much argue that given the strengths of both systems, you could argue that it's a tie for sure (though I kind of disagree with that somewhat)

Thanks for taking the time to watch!

Poké AK Thanks for watching!

Jose M Thanks for watching!

+Hernan Sepulveda Thanks for watching!

***** not this gen, WiiU had a very high rate of bricking out of the box. google it.

Nintendo makes the hummer's of consoles. They rarely if ever fail. In desert storm when the hum-v was released only like 12 of them broke down out of 10s of thousands. I've never had a problem with any of my nintendo systems

samljer That's because people were unplugging their consoles during the day one update. Not Nintendo's fault.

That Guy actually it kinda is their fault. they rushed wii u to the market

Bolek Lolek it was also a business decision. The xbox 360 was rushed into the market and even though it keeps breaking it did well compared to the ps3.

N64 was released 2 years after PS and was barely more powerful than it.

Bolek Lolek PSX released 1995, N64 was 1996. By my math that's one year. Nonetheless, the point he was making was that Nintendo historically released inferior hardware to the competition. So... yeah... uh...

Mizzah Tee Ellipsis...

***** Mizzah Tee However, if you look at the N64, and what he's talking about in the video, it still fits with Nintendo's philosophy. They didn't move to optical discs like the Playstation, and stuck with cartridges, because of the R&D costs. Developers were already used to programming with polygons in a 3D environment, as they've been programming for the Playstation two years before that, and even some stuff on the SNES was polygonal, so there wasn't much R&D that had to be done for that stuff, either. Plus, if you compare the price at launch, the N64 was only $200 USD, compared to the Playstation, which was $300 USD. They may have had more powerful hardware, but cut costs by sticking with what worked, while still appearing to be innovative by introducing a controller with an analog stick. Nintendo is a company that traditionally takes small, inexpensive risks to be innovative, and it usually pays off for them. I think the only time they really took a big risk was with the Wii, and that gamble also worked out in their favor.

***** I was just mentioning it because, even though the N64 is *technically* superior hardware, it still fits with their philosophy.

+Steven cartlidge Thanks for watching!

Got news for you, those aren't all the fifth generation consoles.

***** I would think the latter not the former. Once there is no outlet to get games but "buy them at the store" the price will sky rocket. It is like all the shenanigans with pre ordering crap from game stop. People are getting things in the game unlocked that were there the whole time by "pre ordering" and even though they sold games before they were released the prices on games keep going up and up. The only thing that will stop all this is if people stop buying triple A crap before it's released and people actually wait for the price to come down on stuff.

ScientifikX1 that's what I feel too. That the prices would rise. I'm also one of those people that would wait. I'm always 1 step behind. :( Settling for PC hardware hand-me-downs, like waiting for the new 300 series Radeon (released tomorrow) for prices of the r9 280x to drop hopefully.

***** You need to use question marks.

***** That's not 100% true though. There is definitely a price gouging dynamic going on here. Especially when you consider all the DLC nonsense going on in gaming today where you buy a $60 game and you might have like $70 of DLC crap to pay by the time you buy the "whole game".

Totally agree. ..nothing more naive than all this support the developers nonsense. ...because more demand would only jack up prices...it'll be the atari days all over again, bloated prices and over saturated markets with mediocre games

xD

+ArcadeGames when I hear about WII I think World War II.

I never got over them calling it a wii instead of revolution wii is such a stupid name. Also not letting it play dvds was a BS decision.

Why would you want to get away from the name of the console that sold the most in it's generation and made an absolute butt ton of money for nintendo (can't imagine each wii cost as much as a 360 or ps3 to make and they sold more than both combined....)

Calum Knight main reason is most none gamers (a lot who purchased the wii) though the Wii U was a $300 controller add on.

It would take steps obviously, but it's quite doable. Though I'd prefer they didn't have to resort to it.

I have thought that they could make it cheaper though, make the screen smaller, even if they can get the Wii U down to $250. I don't know how well having the Wii U and 3DS XL at the same price would go over.

Blast processing is not even a real thing, idiot.

Erick Gómez García no shit, moron. It was a joke. You must be really slow

that's actually debatable like there was something the genesis had and I forget exactly what it was but they called it blast processing for marketing purposes

Squigin James Rolfe (of AVGN) has a video where he breaks down the hardware specifics of SNES vs Genesis. Check it out, he mentions that stuff.

yeah the snes vs genesis vid he did right? I've seen every avgn episode at least twice I love James i need to buy the avgn x DVD so I can have all the episodes and so I can give him some cash for all the years of free entertainment and also the 12 days of shitsmas kind of made me like Christmas again at a time where I was really disenchanted with the holiday .

X-Play Archive Use a model one Sega Genesis supply. The NES and Super Famicom us AC and DC (I don't remember which is which). Best not to mix the two. I assume you're in North America, right?

AdamKoralik yes i'm in North America Thank you for the info, I bought my machine at a game store and they handed my the NES power supply. I thought something was up.

False. SNES was ahead of the Genesis, sans the CPU speed. AKA "blast processing." N64 came out a year after the PS1, two after the Saturn. Certain advancements would be made, it makes sense. But using cartridges was so limiting that it didn't matter. It's like having a Ferrari with no fuel. Finally, why do people forget about the XBox?

AdamKoralik Well yes, the SNES was a bit more powerful than the Genesis, which further proves my point that Nintendo was never really a whole generation behind. Just like the Xbox One is able to go toe-to-toe with the PS4. I think Nintendo should be part of it. It's true that the Xbox was more powerful, but the GameCube didn't suffer because of it, you know what I mean? Especially when it came to multiplatform games compared to the Wii and Wii U.

WobBUFFet I never claimed they were a whole generation behind. The point of the video, which I apparently didn't communicate clearly enough and I apologize for that, is that Nintendo has never set out to dominate a generation. The closest that came to happening was the SNES, and it was more of an accident than anything else.

AdamKoralik I know you didn't claim that. I did lol But what I mean is that, Nintendo doesn't need to dominate an entire generation with the most powerful hardware. They just need hardware that is just good enough to be able to keep up with the competition the same way their previous systems have. PS2, for example, was weaker than GC and Xbox, but not significantly weaker that it needed special treatment like the Wii/Wii U. But I do agree with the rest of your video though. Dropping the Gamepad might be a good idea. I do hope they don't announce a new system as soon as 2016 though. I'm thinking about picking one up soon and I was hoping to get more than 2 or 3 years out of it.

exactly

anomaluigi Thanks for watching!

Underpowered and significantly underpowered are two different things. What I said is that Nintendo has never set out to have the most powerful hardware in a generation, and that's true.

why dont you compar the neogeos powr and tell me why it did not win as it was way more power

***** one word ... price

***** Shitty games, shitty graphics and gameplay. Same with the Jaguar even though it was supposed to be "powerful"

WickedJuggalo82 the neo geo had a few great games but not many the point is that power means nothing

That's part of it, also doesn't help that Nintendo doesn't seem to understand the value of advertising.

why i stopped buying consoles cause of this virtual crap bs i like to own a physical copy of my games not digital if i can play them offline then i would buy games again i am glad there is torrents and i can play games offline if i wish to do so mabe i will support the companies when they give a shit about its fanbase only reason why nintendo is making money because there is to many diehard fans out there but that is good i suppose more power to them

Yeah this seems like what has happened

Well, it's 8 years later and his prediction is flat out wrong. There is a 9th generation of consoles, and while digital models exist, Sony and Microsoft have largely conventional, high powered physical media consoles. There is a shift towards digital gaming consoles, but it's MUCH more gradual than he predicted and largely isn't happening in the 9th generation of consoles. He was also dead wrong about the future of Sony. Literally the minute he made this video, Sony went into one of the biggest turnarounds of any corporation in decades. Sony was in serious trouble 8 years ago, with a stock price of around $30. Today, it's upwards of $80, with the company successfully diversifying and thriving.

+TheBigRagoo.com Agreed.

both are important but it depends on the type of game it is. an fps with shitty graphics can ruin it. but a interesting 2d indie game with shitty graphics but great gameplay can be great.

hitek9wittafulclip That’s the dumbest thing i’ve ever heard. FUN is the most important part the gameplay

Thanks!

+AdamKoralik this video is completely flawed beyond belief. super nintendo was 3x times stronger than the Sega Genesis. N64 was 64 bit it crushed the ps1 which was 32 bit. Gamecube and Xbox were both 4x stronger than ps2. Wii u has more than enough power to take ports from the Xbox One. The only system Nintendo has made that's under powered is their handheld devices and the wii. So this video is very misinforming.

+ZackHasGames Super Nintendo was discussed at great length in the video. The N64 is an interesting gray area, it had the horse power, but couldn't use it because of the limitation of cartridges. As a result, it was simply not capable of certain things the PS1 and Saturn could do. While granted there were things it could do that they couldn't. The Xbox was a more advanced console than the GameCube, case closed. The point about the Wii U VS Xbox One is just silly and demonstrably false sir.

i respectfully disagree.

Definitely, and that's how the best games were always decided, playability, from day one. It's where Nintendo has always had a nice spot.

That fuckin wii u controller seems like it adds more cost than just having more powerful hardware would.

Thanks!