Nintendo unveils...GUESS WHAT?

[Nate]

Hey kids, broke your banks to buy the super cool DSi? Well guess what? The DSi sucks! It's so last year! You don't want to be left out in the cold do you? You need a new DS. Another DS.

So Nintendo has heard your desire to give them more money and come out with the Nintendo 3DS!

Yep, now you can play your games...in 3D! WHOOAA! That's like one extra dimension!

http://kotaku.com/5499697/nintendo-announces-new-hardware-the-nintendo-3ds

I don't even know what to say about this it's like you can't even make jokes about it anymore because the jokes become reality. "HEY NINTENDO RELEASES NEW VERSIONS OF THEIR OLD SYSTEMS EVERY TWO YEARS HAW HAW." Well yeah actually they do. DS, DS Lite, DSi, DSi XL, now the 3DS, WHAT IS NEXT NINTENDO? DON'T YOU HAVE ENOUGH MONEY FROM THE LAST THREE SYSTEMS WE BOUGHT FROM YOU?

[CrimsonRyu17]

I wonder if this one is 3 times more fragile too!

Seriously though, DSFat beats all of them. They should start making those again. All of these newer ones hurt my hands and break easily.

[Davidizer13]

The 3DS is actually going to be the successor to the DS as we know it, just like the DS was the successor to the GBA; it's not just a new version of the DS (but it'll still be backwards-compatible with DS games), it's a new system.

But I still liked it better when they called it the Virtual Boy.

[blkmage]

I'm sure it will please us with a depth that might surprise us.

[Nate]

[quote="Davidizer13"]The 3DS is actually going to be the successor to the DS as we know it, just like the DS was the successor to the GBA]
I don't believe this, BUT, in your defense, no specifics have been shown on the system at all. It may not look like the DS at all. It may look completely different. I guess we'll have to wait until E3 to see (I suspect they'll unveil it then).

But if it looks anything remotely like the DS, then I don't care what PR spin Nintendo puts on it, it'll be another freaking version of the DS.

[Cognitive Gear]

But if it looks anything remotely like the DS, then I don't care what PR spin Nintendo puts on it, it'll be another freaking version of the DS.

What if it has more powerful hardware?

EDIT: Here's a link to the official press release (PDF): link

March 23, 2010

To Whom It May Concern:
Re: Launch of New Portable Game Machine

Nintendo Co., Ltd. (Minami-ward of Kyoto-city, President Satoru Iwata) will launch "Nintendo 3DS"(temp) during the fiscal year ending March 2011, on which games can be enjoyed with 3D effects without the need for any special glasses.

"Nintendo 3DS"(temp) is going to be the new portable game machine to succeed "Nintendo DS series", whose cumulative consolidated sales from Nintendo amounted to 125million units as of the end of December 2009, and will include backward compatibility so that the software for Nintendo DS series, including the ones for Nintendo DSi, can also be enjoyed.

We are planning to announce additional details at E3 show, which is scheduled to be held from June 15, 2010 at Los Angeles in the U.S.

It sounds like a whole new device.

[Nate]

What if it has more powerful hardware?

The DSi has more powerful hardware than the DS, specifically, the CPU and RAM are completely different from the DS Lite's. In fact the DSi's processor is twice as fast as the DS Lite's.

And yet the DSi was still another iteration of the DS.

[Cognitive Gear]

The DSi has more powerful hardware than the DS, specifically, the CPU and RAM are completely different from the DS Lite's. In fact the DSi's processor is twice as fast as the DS Lite's.

And yet the DSi was still another iteration of the DS.

True. I suppose that I should have specified that the new hardware is implemented into the games, such that games designed for the 3DS is not playable on the old DS. (Let's go ahead and say that there are entirely new dev kits, as well.)

I'm not sure what else there is to separate platforms. Controllers, maybe, but I personally would rather not see any new buttons added. A joystick might be nice, however.

Anyways, I probably won't get this if it turns out to be DS+3D screen. DS Lite was the only needed redesign, IMO.

[Ante Bellum]

Really? Oh no, I didn't think Nintendo would do this! It's not like they're in it for the money you know! </sarcasm>

Eh, whatever. Either it succeeds or falls on its face. Only way I'm getting one would be five years after its release at a pawn shop for $15.

[Roberts]

Supposedly there is significant evidence to suggest the 3DS will be using some form of the Nvidia Tegra 2 tech. If this holds true, it should be sporting approximately Gamecube level graphics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYtLBh4lPMk&feature=related

And yeah, the press release states that it is the successor to the DS, so I certainly expect a noticeable jump. We'll see come E3 in June regardless (we'll also be seeing the PSP2, almost guaranteed).

[Bobtheduck]

What i find funny is that the one company pushing 3d the most is... guess who?

That's right. Sony. Sony has been building their future Empire on 3d. 3d bluray players,
3d PS3 games, 3d TVs... You know that 3d was in the plans for PSP-2. Nintendo gets to the announcement first, though, so if the idea is successful, Sony will look like they're following the leader again.

Well played, Nintendo.

[Mithrandir]

Out of curiosity, if one bought every one of those machines, would it have cost less than a PS3 at $300.00?

[ShiroiHikari]

Why Nintendo? Why?

[Rusty Claymore]

Mario used to be for the people who couldn't afford uber vacations.
Now 'poor man's Mario 3d' will consist of jumping on turtles.
And I don't even have turtles here!!
At least they are releasing Monster Hunter 3 on the wii. I'd have prefered it on the PS3, but Nintendo has to get some better large cap growth games in, so it's good. Though we'll see...

[mechana2015]

I recall last time they tried a 3D system...
...
...
...

and now I have a headache just thinking about how bad it was.

[Roberts]

Apparently it is going to use Sharp's 3D Parallax Barrier displays, have a 3d Control Stick (?), Rumble, extended wireless range, and extended battery life over the DS.

Colour me interested but sceptical.

At least they are releasing Monster Hunter 3 on the wii. I'd have prefered it on the PS3, but Nintendo has to get some better large cap growth games in, so it's good. Though we'll see...

Could always wait for Monster Hunter Portable 3rd , which is going to be awesome. No water sections in it though, which means no Lagiacrus .



EDIT: Just out of curiosity, is anyone here opposed to the idea of 3D gaming? If so, why?

[Etoh*the*Greato]

What i find funny is that the one company pushing 3d the most is... guess who?

That's right. Sony. Sony has been building their future Empire on 3d. 3d bluray players,
3d PS3 games, 3d TVs... You know that 3d was in the plans for PSP-2. Nintendo gets to the announcement first, though, so if the idea is successful, Sony will look like they're following the leader again.

Well played, Nintendo.

Untrue. Anyone who follows games in any depth knows that Sony has already announced the tech, if just not in any official capacity that I've seen. We already know they're working on it.

Roberts: I am, but not in any large capacity. The need to use a spare pair of glasses is silly to me. In a handheld unit, it means walking around looking goofy while you sit at the bus stop, or in the car, or at the lunch table with your glasses. At home, it would mean in my case at least that several pairs would need to be purchased. I doubt I represent the average consumer, but in my household, games are the form of entertainment. Often, with one playing the console and the others watching.
To clarify, I'm not really so much against the technology as I will not be an early adopter. That's all.

[Roberts]

Just for clarification, the 3DS will not require glasses. The technology supposedly being used (Parallax barrier) is one of those fancy glasses-less 3D techs; the only issues with it being a relatively narrow viewing angle and high production costs.

How narrow will it be on the 3DS? Unknown. One of those things we'll have to see and judge for ourselves.

And yeah, I think the majority of people would agree with you on the point about mandatory glasses for a 3D effect. It really is a pain.


EDIT: But yeah, the reason I asked is because I've been hearing a lot of "3D for games is just a gimmick" talk around the internets, with no real reasoning behind those remarks. Really curious on the different perspectives people have.

[mechana2015]

EDIT: But yeah, the reason I asked is because I've been hearing a lot of "3D for games is just a gimmick" talk around the internets, with no real reasoning behind those remarks. Really curious on the different perspectives people have.

The gimmick comment usually comes when people havn't seen and can't see a reasonable gameplay use for 3D imaging in games or a benefit for adding it to an existing game, other than subtle depth cues that wouldn't really matter in most games.

[Mithrandir]

...But yeah, the reason I asked is because I've been hearing a lot of "3D for games is just a gimmick" talk around the internets, with no real reasoning behind those remarks. Really curious on the different perspectives people have.

Every 3D film, etc that I have seen added no substance whatsoever to the story. In fact, the 3D effects were a distraction that ripped me completely out of the story, so they had the opposite effect. The glasses were often a pain, as well. I stand by the phrase "3D anything at this point is just a gimmick," personally. I think it's the latest fad that doesn't (to me) show any signs of adding anything pertinent to the experience. Kinda like "smell-o-vision" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smell-O-Vision ).

Compare it to other advancements in film/tv/games. I mean, with color, you could give more information to people. With surround sound, you could make it appear something was behind you. 3D let's you know... what's in front of something else...? But you already know what's near and what's far in these movies/games based on what's in front of something else, right? Given the time, money and energy that's being invested here, I simply don't see how the end result product can *continue* to bring in enough additional revenue to support the business model.

Can someone provide a fact-based business case justification for me?

[ShiroiHikari]

Mith makes a good point. 3D, at this time, isn't much more than "OOOH SHINY!". I saw a film in 3D; it was kind of fun but it didn't make the movie any better. 3D gaming has some promise, but it ultimately isn't going to make games any better-- at least not in any way that I can see.

Also, 3D on a handheld?

[Cloud500]

I guess I've never really understood the point of 3D in games or movies for that matter. Things pop out at you, but that's about it. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but having 3D isn't going to make me rush out to purchase a game/console.

And I didn't really think there was a need for a DS redesign, but Nintendo, being a business, likes our money so I guess it was inevitable.

[blkmage]

Hey guys, remember when: touch screens, motion control, dual screens, net play, games on DVDs, 3D graphics, games on CDs, analog sticks, ..., etc. were gimmicks?

[Cognitive Gear]

The only thing I can think of that would make 3D interesting would be if they implemented head tracking tech so that the depth really comes through. This is what I'm talking about.

Link directly to the effect, without the long explanation

[mechana2015]

Hey guys, remember when: touch screens, motion control, dual screens, net play, games on DVDs, 3D graphics, games on CDs, analog sticks, ..., etc. were gimmicks?

Not really for most of those. In general they all provided immediately recognizable improvements in how games in general worked.

Dual screens gave handhelds more real estate on screen without increasing the dimensions excessively to provide additional gameplay elements.

Net play allowed multiplayer interaction and a respite from fighting against AI, as well as introducing social aspects to games.

3D Graphics introduced a whole new scheme for designing games, as well as creating charachters.

CD's increased storage space, therefore game size, therefore details.

Analog sticks, provided increased control and sensitivity.

Touch screen... I haven't found much to like about this yet, but it does allow for a different type of gameplay again, such as the Elite Beat series. I categorize it with specialty controllers, like DDR pads and Guitar Hero Guitars, under the 'sucessful gimmick' category. You COULD play DDR with a controller, but it's not the way it's meant to work.

I'm still not sold on motion control. I havn't seen it used in a way I liked as of yet, both due to issues with detection and sensitivity, and it still falls under the 'gimmick' category for me.

3D Gaming... I'm just not seeing it on current gear as anything BUT gimmick. I'm at a loss for a unique application that would expand gaming unless a wrap around screen becomes standard for PC gaming and goggles for handhelds. Other than that, it becomes a graphics option that provides little benefit and could eat up disk space, depending on how it's programmed.

[blkmage]

Right, but that didn't stop people from screaming 'gimmick' about them before we saw any applications for them, and for many of them, their initial use would be considered extremely gimmicky. Just because you can't conceive of an application now, before any demo exists, doesn't mean that there can't be one or that someone can't come up with one.

[ShiroiHikari]

As far as I'm concerned, motion control is still a gimmick, though I don't think it's any fault of Nintendo's. Developers just aren't biting.

[Etoh*the*Greato]

Hey guys, remember when: touch screens, motion control, dual screens, net play, games on DVDs, 3D graphics, games on CDs, analog sticks, ..., etc. were gimmicks?

Dual screens, touch screens, and motion controls yes. The rest? I was around for the advent of all of them and never saw them referred to as gimmicks. For the most part, I still think people are still trying to get around using the above as anything BUT gimmicks. The DS has had more success than the Wii, but the most successful uses of the motion controls on the Wii have been first party titles imo.

In the cases of the control systems, and dual screens, though (to add to Mith's argument and more commas to this sentence) more useful information was given to the user in the case of the dual screens and with the controls they're taking advantage of something that is unique to gaming: The ability of the gamer to manipulate the game world. The fact that these control schemes are so often regarded as gimmicks is because of a slow adoption rate by users and poor implimentation by developers. There HAS to be something that these controls can do better than other previous control schemes before they will become staples.

3D is a nice imaging trick, and on the surface it feels like the next natural step in gaming's constant evolutionary growth of graphics processing. The parallax screen mentioned has my attention piqued to be sure, but I stand by what I said. I'm cautious.

[mechana2015]

Right, but that didn't stop people from screaming 'gimmick' about them before we saw any applications for them, and for many of them, their initial use would be considered extremely gimmicky. Just because you can't conceive of an application now, before any demo exists, doesn't mean that there can't be one or that someone can't come up with one.

They've been talking about 3D game stuff for years, and Nintendo even tried it once before with the Virtual Boy and I still have yet to see or hear of an application that really makes 3D an integral part of the game. The closest thing I've seen so far is a large arcade game sized device that is at disneyland, and requires glasses to work, as well as a 40" wide screen. I particularaly don't see how a portable system can use something like that, but if you've got ideas, feel free to share.

[Nate]

Analog sticks were referred to as gimmicks? I don't recall that at all. Especially since well, that's what the arcade games used back in the day, as well as every other game system that was out at the time. If anything was a gimmick it would be the D-pad, since that supplanted the analog stick as the primary method of control (because they tend to not break as much). Still I've never heard analog sticks referred to as a gimmick. Ever.

In fact, gamers who play fighting games have always touted the advantages of a stick over a D-pad. So I'd say that claim is pretty unfounded.

Same with internet play.

Now, actually, you are right about the games on CDs/DVDs. They were touted as a gimmick. And guess what? THEY WERE. The Sega CD died in part due to the fact that instead of using the extra storage space to make cooler games with better sound and graphics, developers had a love affair with being able to put actual video on the discs. This led to all those games with grainy video footage of D-list actors like Sewer Shark, Night Trap, and so on.

It wasn't really until the Playstation that disc-based games became more than a gimmick (I'm ignoring the PC here for obvious reasons).

That's the problem something like, say, motion control is facing now. Maybe at some point a game or system will come along and do for motion control or 3D the same thing that the Playstation did for disc games. But it hasn't happened yet, and as of now all they are is gimmicks. I really honestly fail to see how they can do anything remotely interesting or involved in these to make them not gimmicks. Motion control is wonky at best, some games do it well, but no game does it perfect. A button and D-pad or analog stick is absolutely more precise and responsive than motion control could ever be at its best.

Everything that 3D could add to games has literally already been done. It was done with Super Mario 64, which was in 3D. There was depth and you could see things far away, and get close to them, and walk around them. There. That's 3D's contribution to gaming. There's no need to add 3D effects except to say "WHOAAAAAAAAAA THAT THING IS TOTALLY REACHING OUT OF THE SCREEN AT YOU FAR OUT MAN!" which got old when it was tried in the 50s with movies. I'm also with Mith on the Smell-O-Vision thing, "Whoa being able to smell what they're smelling in the movie would totally make it more interactive!" sounds exactly what they're trying to do with this 3D thing.

It's why I'm against 3D in movies. They tried it once and it was dumb. Now they're trying it again and it's just as dumb, only it's not as obvious because they got rid of the cheesy red-blue glasses.