Naughty Dog Co-Founder: Nintendo ?Irrelevant as a Hardware Manufacturer?

[Mr.Mattress]

This is just pure console mysticism.

The reason the PS4 and the XboxOne have gone to PC architecture (with their own additions, like the shared system/video memory) is because it's the best configuration given current technology. There's nothing to be gained from using a processor with a different instruction set just for the sake of using a processor with a different instruction set. Making developers learn to work with new hardware doesn't help anyone. Developing your own architecture and having it be competitive is simply no long feasible with how complex existing architectures have become.

Even the Wii U isn't particularly architecturally special. It's running a PowerPC processor and an AMD graphics chip.

And what are you even on about with this "updating internally" stuff? PCs are perfectly capable of updating their software and firmware, and you can't exactly update the Wii U's hardware over the internet.

Also, nobody is "still confused as to what the WiiU can and can't actually do". It's architecturally the same as the Wii. They're just struggling with getting things to run on the hardware because it's got such a weak processor.

1) If PC Architecture is the best configuration for current day technology, why are they still trying to make consoles then? Why not just build PC's? They clearly can, because the PS4 and XBone are built like PCs.

2) It's more architectually special then the PS4 and XBone, as it isn't built like a Mini-Computer.

3) Can you, or are you allowed to, open up a PS4 or an XBone and just put whatever memory card, processor, mother board, or any other computer component in there? No, your not allowed to, and you can't because that would screw up the actual system. No one is arguing that you can't do that with a PC, because you can. You cannot do that with a Console.

4) I may have to concede on your last point, but from what I had read, the way it was architecturally built was confusing to Computer Geniuses, and all the bits didn't seem like they would work well together but they ended up doing just that. I can't find the article however.

That isn't a good thing. It means its harder for both first and third party developers to produce quality optimized games for your platform. Why would you do that to your own business partners, on whom you depend for sales?

First Parties will have no trouble using the hardware, because Nintendo knows how to work with it's own hardware. True, it is a pain in the butt for lazy third parties that want instant results, but a multitude of third parties that actually try (Ubisoft, Activision, Shin'En Multimedia) can make great looking and great playing games on the console.

This doesn't make sense. The consoles in terms of processing ability will all age at exactly the same rate. It may be more noticeable in the xbone and the ps4 as they have farther to fall than the wiiU, but that's it. If a wiiU game looks worse than a ps4 game today, in three years it will still look worse than a ps4 game. The only saving grace for a wiiU game is that a wiiU game from today may only look only marginally worse than a wiiU game in 3 years, as opposed to how poor a ps4 game may compare to a future iteration, but that won't help it in comparisons to other digital media.

It will when the PC's graphics become ginormously improved over the XBOne's and the PS4's. Remember when people where saying that the XBox 360 and PS3 had worse graphics then PC's? It's just gonna keep happening and happening and happening if Consoles keep trying to be Computers. Consoles need to be different from Computers, otherwise what's the point of making Consoles? If Microsoft and Sony aren't gonna try to make Consoles, and instead make Computers-in-all-but-name-and-abilities, why not just make Computers? At least Nintendo still makes Consoles, and not lame, restricted computers that will soon be out-of-date models. If I want to play Computer games, I'll stick with a Computer, not an XBone or a PS4.

 

[Ragsnstitches]

Ah yes, Naughty Dog, Playstation exclusive Naughty Dog.

What valuable input.

Read the topic, not just the headline.

The quoted man was a co-founder but left Naughty Dog about a decade ago. More recently he was the president of THQ before it caved.

I have no idea why naughty dog was even mentioned considering how irrelevant to the topic they are.

OP: When you try to compare Nintendo with Sony or MS then yeah, they can feel like they are out of touch.

Nintendos new console is flailing quite a bit. I think they overestimated how eagerly owners of the Wii would transition to the WiiU. Many of that group treated the console like a DVD player, in that they won't get a new one until the old one kicks it. Heck, from word of mouth many of my friends didn't even realise the WiiU was a new system, they just thought it was a new accessory.

That said, the WiiU seems like a console I would pick up on top of one of the other platforms, not exclusively. It offers local multiplayer that the other platforms seem eager to discard and are more sociable platforms then PC. PS or Xbox (gaming wise). So I think, in the long run, the comparisons won't stand for much... Nintendo will etch out its own userbase within the other platforms userbase.

 

[daveNYC]

Consoles are suppose to be architecturally built uniquely. Every Console before the XBox had a unique architecture within them that 3rd Parties where then suppose to learn. Even the PS3 had a Unique Architecture within it (At first, I don't know about later models).

The WiiU is the only home console this gen not built like a Computer inside it (Which is why Technical Geniuses are still confused as to what the WiiU can and can't actually do). Both the PS4 and XBone are built like Computers inside of them, which kind of defeats the purpose: Why should they keep building consoles if all they're gonna do is build computers? Not only that, these Computers can't be updated internally (Or at least, they aren't suppose to be updated internally). Even though the WiiU will suffer from aging, it's suppose to age like that because it's not built like a computer. But the Mini-Computers will suffer even more (Especially since they're suppose to be the "Graphic Powerhouse" consoles).

What are you on about? There's no rule that says a console can't use an x86 or ARM based main processor, or that it has to use a custom GPU. Hell, the PS3's cell architecture, while neat, was a good chunk of why the PS3 had issues last generation. It was a ***** to learn and develop for, and that limited the speed at which games were released for it, thus cutting into the year lead it had over the 360 (price didn't help either).

The magic thing that consoles offer isn't some non-standard architecture, hell, that's the last thing you'd want your hardware to bring to the table. What they offer is the absolute knowledge of what CPU, GPU, RAM, Storage, OS, Controllers, and APIs they will be developing for. This simplifies the development, optimization and testing of code like you would not believe.

In this generation, the fact that both the PS4 and XBone are basically running the same hardware (AMD Jaguar architecture CPU and an AMD GPU) means that developing games for each platform becomes that much easier. Want to do an exclusive? Chances are you can use the same dev team for either platform. Want to make a game for both boxes? Porting the code is going to be a hell of a lot easier than trying to bounce between the 360's PowerPC and the PS3's Cell platforms. The Wii U OTOH, has custom everything. You might say that consoles should each have a unique architecture that developers have to learn in order to develop games for that platform, but you know what most developers are going to do if given the choice between two consoles that use very similar and near off the shelf components vs. a console that has a custom GPU and CPU in it?

Also, you're using the word 'computer' wrong. It doesn't just mean that something is Mac or Wintel. All consoles are computers, they just happen to be highly specialized ones.

 

[Poppy JR.]

Also, Nintendo's two last home consoles were decidedly family-targeted. That means that Nintendo will want to sell them at a low price point to appeal to families. Wii U has been a flop so far, though. Could be valid at the moment. Nintendo recently hasn't been renowned for the speed and raw horsepower of the wii, but it sold well for its library.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

Indeed. I think MovieBob in his Game Overthinker spot for E3 described the Xbone as basically "having all of the weaknesses of a computer with none of the strengths", with the idea that being able to upgrade the individual hardware was one of the things that made up for the weaknesses of the PC. (Allowing for modding was another.)

In my opinion, I don't think the WiiU is anything close to irrelevant. One thing I've seen Nintendo try and do, with varying degrees of success, is try and find ways to make the games fun...both in the gameplay itself and with the hardware. Their only problem has been that third party developers haven't really committed to the idea of playing around with the hardware to see what could be done with it. As such, third party games have also been hit or miss. I think Sony might have picked up on this somewhat by giving the PS4 a better internal archetecture to make it easier for outside developers to make games...but the problem is the PS4 is still a piece of hardware that doesn't really innovate or encourage experimentation. Add to that the fact that it cannot have it's hardware upgraded under normal circumstances, and like Mr. Matress said the value of the PS4 will likely stagnate as a result since nothing particularly interesting or new will be created or will want people to go back and play those games in several years' time. Nintendo at least has made games and systems that people have wanted to go back to and play again, which is one of the reasons they are still in both the console AND game development markets.

Hell...I've heard of people who now wish to play the VIRTUAL BOY just out of curiosity's sake! THAT should tell you something!

Speaking of innovation and experimentation, here's an article Cracked put up today:

http://www.cracked.com/article_20749_6-iconic-video-games-that-were-created-by-technical-problems.html

Nintendo has HALF of those entries. And as one commenter said "So the moral of the story is that noone's creative unless you put artificial limitations on their unoriginal ideas." That sums up Nintendo's mindset. They don't make anything more powerful than it NEEDS to be. If you don't put limitations on people they'll just get lazy and complacent, which is exactly what MS and Sony are encouraging. They're allowing 3rd parties (oddly, mostly Western ones) to get away with doing things half-assed. This can't go on forever and letting them get away with this is pathetic.

 

[BloodSquirrel]

1) If PC Architecture is the best configuration for current day technology, why are they still trying to make consoles then? Why not just build PC's? They clearly can, because the PS4 and XBone are built like PCs.

Because
A) Consumers are buying them. The Xbone and PS4 are both selling extremely well. Is there any other reason that Sony or MS should need?

B) Being a fixed hardware format still has technical advantages. It allows developers to optimize specifically for that hardware, and it means that developers can be allowed deeper into the system internals (With a PC, developers have to program on top of abstraction layers, because they don't know whether you'll be running it on an AMD card or and Nvidia card). It allows them to go with a shard memory pool, and allows them to streamline the interfaces between components in general. It also means that they can mass-manufacture the things, making them cheaper.

2) It's more architectually special then the PS4 and XBone, as it isn't built like a Mini-Computer.

How is it not build like a mini-computer? You know that apple used to use PowerPC processors in their computers, right? And, again, why is that an advantage?

3) Can you, or are you allowed to, open up a PS4 or an XBone and just put whatever memory card, processor, mother board, or any other computer component in there? No, your not allowed to, and you can't because that would screw up the actual system. No one is arguing that you can't do that with a PC, because you can. You cannot do that with a Console.

Okay... and that helps the Wii U over the Xbone and PS4 how? You can't upgrade a WiiU's hardware either.

4) I may have to concede on your last point, but from what I had read, the way it was architecturally built was confusing to Computer Geniuses, and all the bits didn't seem like they would work well together but they ended up doing just that. I can't find the article however.

That sounds a lot like the kind of marketing hype we've been getting for years (especially from Sony), where they like to pretend that the console is a magical box where that they can always keep pulling more power from (when, in reality, PS3/Xbox360 games plateaued years ago graphically).

 

[Zenn3k]

Sales figures don't lie, he is completely correct.

I have a PS4, I haven't so much as even considered a WiiU after the Wii I purchased on launch day became a nice dust collector since it literally had nothing I wanted to play because of its inferior hardware.

Honestly, Nintendo should have waited for the PS4 and XBONE to come out, upped their hardware specs a bit, then released, so they could ALSO get access to the 3rd party titles that actually sell. I'm sure Super Mario 3D world XX Hyper Mushroom Stew edition is a great game, but I simply don't care enough to drop $360 to find out.

 

[Mr.Mattress]

What are you on about? There's no rule that says a console can't use an x86 or ARM based main processor, or that it has to use a custom GPU. Hell, the PS3's cell architecture, while neat, was a good chunk of why the PS3 had issues last generation. It was a ***** to learn and develop for, and that limited the speed at which games were released for it, thus cutting into the year lead it had over the 360 (price didn't help either).

So, instead of trying to learn how to make games for a platform, like all developers had to do generations before, your telling me that 3rd parties decided to be lazy, not try at all to make good looking and good playing games for the PS3 just because they would have to actually Try hard?

I know a lot of 3rd parties are lazy, but the more I keep being told "Why should they have to learn something? They should be given everything they want with no problem" the more I think that they're spoiled brats that need a time out.

And if I was given something hard to do, could I simply say "Screw it, I won't try hard" and still expect good results? No! In the real world, if I did that, I would either fail or be fired! Perhaps 3rd parties need to fail and be fired instead of coddled!

The magic thing that consoles offer isn't some non-standard architecture, hell, that's the last thing you'd want your hardware to bring to the table. What they offer is the absolute knowledge of what CPU, GPU, RAM, Storage, OS, Controllers, and APIs they will be developing for. This simplifies the development, optimization and testing of code like you would not believe.

That's called a PC good sire, if they want to develop for a PC then they should develop for a PC. For every generation of Video games, consoles have been unique: You didn't know what you would be getting out of them. Even the PS1, PS2 and PS3 had unique architectures that Devs had to learn to succeed with.

And the Simplification of Developement has lead to serious problems in the game department: Graphics over Gameplay, Very serious "Fallow The Leader" problems, Bloated Budgets, the demand that games sell multimillions of copies or they die instantly, and Failing studios. So how is that a good thing?

In this generation, the fact that both the PS4 and XBone are basically running the same hardware (AMD Jaguar architecture CPU and an AMD GPU) means that developing games for each platform becomes that much easier. Want to do an exclusive? Chances are you can use the same dev team for either platform. Want to make a game for both boxes? Porting the code is going to be a hell of a lot easier than trying to bounce between the 360's PowerPC and the PS3's Cell platforms. The Wii U OTOH, has custom everything. You might say that consoles should each have a unique architecture that developers have to learn in order to develop games for that platform, but you know what most developers are going to do if given the choice between two consoles that use very similar and near off the shelf components vs. a console that has a custom GPU and CPU in it?

Yep: They're gonna be lazy, they're gonna seek instant success and gratification, they're not gonna try hard, and they're going to release something that's "Popular" to make sure it succeeds and put cash in their pocket, whether it actually should or not.

At least with Nintendo, all their sequels try hard to be somewhat different from one another. What's the real difference between CoD: Black Ops and CoD: Black Ops II Besides Graphics and a few different guns? Nothing really.

Also, you're using the word 'computer' wrong. It doesn't just mean that something is Mac or Wintel. All consoles are computers, they just happen to be highly specialized ones.

While I agree with you that Consoles are Highly Specialized Computers, the XBone and PS4 don't do enough to be Specialized enough.

 

[Something Amyss]

Lol,Nintendo is doing well for itself unlike most AAA devs and actually makes games that people don't hate.

Naughty Dog seems to do alright for itself. I mean, sure, it's milking Uncharted to death....

Hey, maybe that's why he's commenting. He's jealous that Nintendo has more than one franchise to milk.

No, but seriously:

There is no developer? that will ever be [Nintendo visionary Shigeru] Miyamoto. It is a crime that we do not play those games on the systems that we have.

Right from the article. He's not panning Nintendo, just their relevance and their hardware. Sounds like he wishes he could get that shit on another console. Which is fair enough. I want Super Mario 3D land, but not enough to pay for another box with useless crap in it.

And considering I feel even less motivated to buy a Bone or PS4 right now (because Wii U at least has a couple of exclusives I care about), I'd appreciate it if people keep that in mind before labeling me a "hater."

 

[EvilRoy]

That isn't a good thing. It means its harder for both first and third party developers to produce quality optimized games for your platform. Why would you do that to your own business partners, on whom you depend for sales?

First Parties will have no trouble using the hardware, because Nintendo knows how to work with it's own hardware. True, it is a pain in the butt for lazy third parties that want instant results, but a multitude of third parties that actually try (Ubisoft, Activision, Shin'En Multimedia) can make great looking and great playing games on the console.

A pain in the butt for lazy third parties? It's a pain in the butt for everyone first, third, lazy, adept. Nintendo programmers didn't just magically know how to develope for the wiiU, they just had a leg up on everyone else by having a head start.

Things don't get easier or cost less when you approach with a can-do attitude. And for zero benefit other than the right to produce a game for a nintendo console, which didn't do Ubisoft any favours considering the fact that they view ZombiU as a failure.

This doesn't make sense. The consoles in terms of processing ability will all age at exactly the same rate. It may be more noticeable in the xbone and the ps4 as they have farther to fall than the wiiU, but that's it. If a wiiU game looks worse than a ps4 game today, in three years it will still look worse than a ps4 game. The only saving grace for a wiiU game is that a wiiU game from today may only look only marginally worse than a wiiU game in 3 years, as opposed to how poor a ps4 game may compare to a future iteration, but that won't help it in comparisons to other digital media.

It will when the PC's graphics become ginormously improved over the XBOne's and the PS4's. Remember when people where saying that the XBox 360 and PS3 had worse graphics then PC's? It's just gonna keep happening and happening and happening if Consoles keep trying to be Computers.

Are you under the impression that the wiiU will be immune to this comparison? Because it won't, wii graphics look terrible compared to ps3 graphics, which look terrible compared to high end PC graphics. The only thing going for them was cell shading and artstyle choice, and anybody can do that.

Consoles need to be different from Computers, otherwise what's the point of making Consoles?

Well, having standardized internal components allows for easier development, better optimization and over time reduced unit costs. You don't have to have a ridiculous proprietary architecture to get those benefits.

 

[cikame]

Super Mario 3D Land, 60fps, fast load times, looks great, responsive controls.
Every Naughty Dog PS3 game, long load times, distractingly bad shadows and effects, rough animation, low frame rate, terrible input lag.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

So, instead of trying to learn how to make games for a platform, like all developers had to do generations before, your telling me that 3rd parties decided to be lazy, not try at all to make good looking and good playing games for the PS3 just because they would have to actually Try hard?

I know a lot of 3rd parties are lazy, but the more I keep being told "Why should they have to learn something? They should be given everything they want with no problem" the more I think that they're spoiled brats that need a time out.

And if I was given something hard to do, could I simply say "Screw it, I won't try hard" and still expect good results? No! In the real world, if I did that, I would either fail or be fired! Perhaps 3rd parties need to fail and be fired instead of coddled!

Ever since hardware manufacturers started coddling 3rd parties, it's led to a LOT of bad habits in development. Instead of being responsible and mature about what they were given, 3rd parties proceeded to be completely reckless and sloppy with their efforts as well as lazy. It's the equivalent of giving a teenager $10,000 and being surprised when he calls you after he's gotten drunk off his ass and pissed in a sports car. However, instead of calling 3rd parties out on their stupid behavior, Sony and MS continue to bail them out time and time again. It's pathetic and it needs to STOP. Someone has to put their foot down and tell 3rd parties to grow up.

 

[mysecondlife]

Honestly, I'm not too fond of Nintendo's hardwares either. (Most of my gripes are with N64 and GC controllers.)

Because, of course, this man is a guru of video gaming and everything he says should be written down and treated as scripture. I mean, his almighty company known as "THQ" is the greatest video game company ever and is beloved by everyone and is still going strong even today.

... oh wait.

Its funny..

Even if THQ is the great video game company, etc. I think you'd find another way to dismiss his opinion.

 

[BrotherRool]

He's right. Most third-party developers won't bother with it because of the much inferior hardware.

Or because they are too lazy to work with hardware that does'nt focus on pretty textures.Seriously the inferiour hardware excuse is pretty thin at this point.

I don't think it's about inferior hardware at this point. The Wii wasn't a great example of proving the third-party games could sell on an Nintendo console and so far the Wii U has been a horrific shambles for selling third-party games with them literally losing tens of millions.

Even the non-Nintendo games that reviewed well haven't sold 1/4 of the games they should have. Even Fifa probably lost money on just porting the game (FIFA on the PS4 has already outsold FIFA on the WiiU, despite only releasing in Germany and the UK this week)

No third-party developer is going to risk making games for the Wii U until it has a much larger install base and until another third-party developer shows you can make a game for it and not have it fail horribly

 

[GamemasterAnthony]

Speaking of innovation and experimentation, here's an article Cracked put up today:

http://www.cracked.com/article_20749_6-iconic-video-games-that-were-created-by-technical-problems.html

Nintendo has HALF of those entries. And as one commenter said "So the moral of the story is that noone's creative unless you put artificial limitations on their unoriginal ideas." That sums up Nintendo's mindset. They don't make anything more powerful than it NEEDS to be. If you don't put limitations on people they'll just get lazy and complacent, which is exactly what MS and Sony are encouraging. They're allowing 3rd parties (oddly, mostly Western ones) to get away with doing things half-assed. This can't go on forever and letting them get away with this is pathetic.

QFT. And people wonder why the industry is stagnating!

CAPTCHA: million dollars

Heh...speaking of money talks...

 

[Radoh]

Irrelevant to Naughty Dog, sure. Irrelevant altogether? Hell no.
Or did everyone forget that when the Wii came out and was printing money that both Sony and Microsoft decided to stick their fingers in the Motion Control pies with the respective Playstation Move and the Microsoft Kinect?
Irrelevant is too strong a word to prescribe to the guys that are making the things that the other guys are making inferior copies of.