Nintendo are pretty good at ignoring massive trends, so I'm not sure if this will happen. But I think they would be silly not to. VR is actually looking like a real mainstream success story this time around. It's not even being that stupidly priced out of the gate.
Hands up - who would buy a Virtual Boy 2 (or general Nintendo VR unit) if it meant you could play Zelda/Mario/Metroid in VR?
True. Looking at the timing, they will have a good chance to at least see how consumer's have bought in with the other VR units before having to commit to production or bundling.
That said, they don't want to be in a situation where a lot of great third-party VR games are being made and they are out in the cold again.
They could always just partner with Oculus or something I guess.
Sometimes, yeah. They do. Other times they attempt to set trends, only to fall flat on their face. I think they would have an advantage over a lot of VR headsets with just the name alone. I hope they hop in. I want massive comparisons of 5-10 VR headsets. I need choices!
@XB1_PS4 "I think they would have an advantage over a lot of VR headsets with just the name alone" In no way would the Virtual Boy name be a good thing Nintendo sure but Virtual Boy come on.I would think its best to get a way from the Virtual Boy name for them.
Nintendo Reality ,Wii VR are some names that I could see being better from a marketing standpoint.
"And here I thought by going mobile and the whole micro-transaction enchilada was actually Nintendo settling for the status quo of easy greedy money... "
Good point. I mean traditionally, they have always done their own thing. But yeah, the latest move does seem out of character.
We've yet to see how their mobile plans will work out but yeah, prima facie, it looks like those moves are driven solely for the sake of profitability.
Thats true but it can be very dangerous especially if the trend doesn't turn out well (Wii U). Well you have to have someone in the industry trying new things. Then when those things become popular the competition will adopt it.
Nah, Nintendo only tries to differentiate itself when it can't compete. For example the power wars of the 90's was Nintendo following a trend of trying to release the most powerful and graphically intense console, they would make commercials back and forth with sega, taking shts at one another talking about how their console is more powerful,that was until Playstation came out and started to dominate, after realizing they culdnt afford to compete, they turned to the motion control, which was a Sega and Plasystation product, but they did make it trendy for sure.
Uh Nintendo hasn't led trends since the SNES.....The Wiimote/motion controls was stolen from The Wand that was being developed by Sony in 2002 that was being shown in 2002 and patented in 2004 FACT, all they did was dumb down the tech and Sony shelved it until they were happy with how it worked....The gamepad is just jumping on the tablet craze that was already going on....
They don't lead anything anymore, they use other ideas that were in development years before the use it or jump on existing trends....
The only thing Nintendo innovates anymore are their handhelds...
When I try to think of what Sony has really contributed to gaming in terms of innovation, I draw a blank or when I look it up I find it was done before Sony did it. This isn't really to knock Sony, as obviously they have pretty much lead the game industry for the past 20 years so they have definitely done a lot right. But they have played it safe. I think this is best shown by looking at what they have named their home consoles.
- CD ROM based console done right (ps1), - DVD and blu ray introduction in consoles (ps2, ps3)and all the benefits that came with their bigger storage capabilities, - Console multiplayer (socom ps2), - Remote Play - Share Play - Getting something for free on a paid online service (PS plus free games) - Console VR done right, Project Morpheus (yes it hasn't come out yet, but if I was to take into account of all hands on previews out there I'd say they got this one in the bag)
What? That was a weird approach to that list. You talk about things being 'done right' as innovations? Really? And you put online game in there?
CD-ROM based gaming was done before. The PS1 was just a good console.
DVD and BLU-RAY- yup
PS Plus- yes but this was only born because of their compelte failings in the social features of the PS3 which leads us to:
"Console multiplayer (socom ps2)" Er no. What about Dreamcast?
The Xbox is the console that did it, and did it right. It mandated a broadband connection and it really set it off. Plus it had the likes of Halo 2 that single handedly silenced all naysayers about the ability of consoles to do competitive online gaming.
Console VR- lets wait for the thing to come out first.
As for Nintendo- it was always set the trends with touch screen, motion controls which the other two console makers desperately scrambled to incorporate into their consoles and jump on the bandwagon. Then, even with the Wii U tablet, we've seen that kind of extension on both platforms.
Then Nintendo's games themselves have spawned so many pretenders. Their platformers spawned countless imitators, Zelda (remember Dark Cloud?), their party games, their mass-market games like Wii Fitness for instance. There are tons of examples.
Man sony is getting criticized for not naming their console playstation dolphin or sumthin silly. These xbox fanboys just cant seem to keep sony out of their mouth. I used to be a big time Nintendo fan. I had a N64 loooong before i had a PS1 even though PS1 was out first. What made me switch was when i saw MGS on PS1 for the first time and then i realized Sony was right CD roms are better for making games than lame cartridges. I haven't looked back ever since.
PS1 and PS2 had by far better and more innovative games in my opinion. Microsoft and the Xbox 360 for me just brought the shooter full force into consoles. Now every console game wants to be a shooter or fps and to me nothing innovative about that. I think my greatest dislike about the XBox is my belief that its a shooter console. Yes i know it has more games than just shooters.
Not a big fan of shooters so XBox console just doesn't have as much draw for me as it does for others.
Firstly we had the phenomenal success of the Nintendo Wii, which had Sony and Microsoft realise that they needed to innovate to win customers.
Secondly we had the "PC Renaissance", which ultimately led to the Oculus Rift, developed by "some guy" getting funded. Nintendo used to be great innovators when it was a battle of the giants, but now we have innovation coming from the ground up, and they are a bit behind.
I don't see what Nintendo can do at this stage beyond take Virtual Reality and do it better, or in a somewhat different way. Perhaps we'll get other senses included with the headset: smell, taste or even sensation on the skin (maybe they can simulate raindrops or something).
VR is the future, and we've all known it since we were kids. If Nintendo are to do anything new, it will be taking a different path to it than Oculus, Sony and Valve.
Actually Sony was working on motion controls before Nintendo, they just didn't make in the primary focus of the console and focused other aspects (smart long term decision). Nintendo likely scrambled to incorporate motion controls into their console which is why they used a subpar means to implement motion controls which was why it was very inaccurate and required the wii motion plus to help (released three years later and still didn't make it as accurate as the move).
Face it, Nintendo is not the trendsetter some people make them out to be in the console space. Their version of motion controls (IR based) did not make any impact on core gaming, and only proved to be a gimmick that deterred core gamers. Some, if not most, of the consoles best games did not really utilize motion controls.
And their current approach to second screen gaming, or remote play, with the Wii u game pad isn't setting any relevant trends. It can't even mirror games too far from the console, so it's not really remote play. It's actually impractical, the game pad needs to be so close to the console that you might as well game on the television.
For the past two console generations Nintendo has made underpowered consoles with the primary focus on technology that does not meaningfully impact core gaming experiences. They are cool for novelty, but that's about it. No trends have been set.
You can do it first, or you can do it right. When it comes to hardware and tech, Nintendo seems to prefer the former. It's rather odd, they seem to be the opposite with software, they take their time and do it right, and it pays off.
VR is incredibly taxing on hardware. The textures and draw distances needed for good VR experiences is not easy. Plus you have to roughly double the image(one for each eye). Nintendo hasn't built very strong hardware for a few generations now. Unless this virtual boy is a standalone product or they Nintendo really beefs up the power in their next console, I doubt Nintendo will do VR anytime soon. This article is purely wild speculation about Nintendo following the VR grail.
Funny thing is, that neither the X1 nor the PS4 is actually strong enough for full VR experiences. Also most PCs out there wont cut it.
It's a tech just emerging. I think it will take another 3-5 years to fully utilize it. It's a next gen thing. It may actually get selling point for the Steamboxes imo.
@ark I can only speak from personal experience with the Rift, but it did work the piss out of my 670 and that was 720p-ish and well under 60fps. The experience was incredible, don't get me wrong, but to get 120fps would take a lot of horsepower or sacrifice textures. And you are absolutely correct. I have no idea how any console will get VR running unless the headset can augment the consoles power.
They already excel at creating games that make the most out of their hardware. Imagine star fox. It would also be very nice to have a fun, cartoony option for VR. Everything seems to be realistic/gritt right now
They don't need their own VR. They just annouced a service that operates on all platforms I care about with VR solutions that I can say are the real deal. oculus rift, and even the mobile VR solutions are pretty good. So ummmm they can just use what others have already built.
Technically the wii was a VR system with out the headset and the wiiu is the VR window idea. So you could argue we are in the nintendo VR landscape now. I mean come on the 3ds is in 3d and even does eye tracking like the hololens LOL.
They haven't led a console trend since the SNES...They still do it with their handlelds, but console-wise they borrow heavily and follow trends...
Sony was developing The Wand and showing it off in 2002, it was patented then shelved in 2004 because they were unhappy with it and decided to wait until they could get it working properly...Nintendo clearly liked the demos, and decided to borrow it dumbing down the tech and releasing it as if they thought of it.....
The Wii U was nothing but jumping on the tablet craze and hoping that if they tethered it to a console the tablet lovers would flock to it...And now it sits as their second worst selling console sitting at under 10 million and numbers aren't really improving after almost 3 years.....
They used to lead the way though, the SNES was amazing
they making bussiness..not guarantee success if they just blindly followed this so called massive trend...
better if they stay in their path...making one unique things might be better than just follow the usual flow..well depends,not always going smoothly,but our beloved industry really need innovative idea from them
As I've stated before, I'm not sold on VR as it stands.
I can imagine people complaining about neck strain from persistent unfamiliar weight and a LOT more rapid neck movements than people are used to using during their daily routines [shooters, especially, you've gotta be looking around everywhere, a lot more rapidly than your everyday neck movements, to avoid getting ambushed], and eye strain from having a closer-than-normal screen, in the long term, with these devices.
There's also just a strange disconnect with how the immersion of such a device works, for me. Right now it's basically just cutting off your vision of anything but the game, and that's it. To me, that feels a little unnatural, compared to what I imagine it would feel like if we had some full-synapse VR going on. Yeah, I know; our tech isn't at that SAO-ish level yet, but we can't be that far off, can we? I mean, we've already gotten some doctors that have used VR tech that's hooked up directly to someone's brain to give a formerly-blind-from-birth person the ability to see the world around them in black and white with his own eyes. That's pretty impressive stuff, and it shows that we're slowly inching into the realm of plausibility for full-synapse VR.
But I digress... as VR stands now, it would take a MONUMENTAL kind of gaming experience for me to want to adopt it. A few rounds of a shooter or adventure game in first person, with a VR visor strapped to my noggin, isn't enough to convince me to plunk down upwards of $300.
Not even if it's from Nintendo. Not even for a new entry in the Metroid Prime universe, which is probably one of the games I can imagine it working best with.
VR isn't just turning your head to look around. It is an all encompassing experience. It tricks your brain into seeing and feeling depth and range like never before. I can't remember feeling true fear in gaming until I fell to my death in a Rift demo.
From what it sounds like, the NX isn't VR. Also, they don't exactly have too many games that would benefit too much for it. They might release a demo of a new Metroid on the PC with VR to advertise the new game, but I doubt it.
A stand a lone VR device from Nintendo won't see the light of day until VR parts for mobile/portable devices cost goes down, especially if they want to match the graphics fidelity of other VR devices out on the market.
I Think Early in the VR era users who pay premium prices to have VR experiences will benefit the most until the portable VR technology become affordable for everyone.
Oh, VR won't happen on Wii U either because the necessary hardware power needed to have good VR experience isn't possible on wii U.
Virtual Boy gave me headaches, and hurt my eyes even after short periods of time. If they are doing this, they need to test the sh*t outta this, and make sure it doesnt do that to people
I was just thinking the same thing even though april is still a couple weeks away.
Would nintendo REALLY go back down this road, though? I doubt it. Maybe a VR headset for NX, who knows but I dont think they would ever make a virtual boy 2.
I bought the Virtual Boy for $30 when they were being discontinued at KB Toys. It came with Mario Tennis, but I also got Teleroboxer and Wario Land. I think I spent all my allowance on this, but I never regretted it.
Not sure I'd buy another in this day and age of big flat screens being available...
So fake. Nintendo has already said they aren't interestedin VR and even talked bad about it. How does this even get approved? Please people, don't approve stuff like this, maybe as an opinion piece but even still, Nintendo has literally said things in the opposite direction of this BS rumor
Yeah thats why so many film- makers are experimenting with it right now. and you all remember how much film-makers experimented with the transformative and innovative tech that was Kinect....
Last I heard we were gonna get Virtual Boy games on the 3DS but that never happens, Nintendo have gone off the boil on 3DS over last few months even sega have released more 3D classics than Nintendo have now haha. On another point tho club Nintendo has been updated in Europe, no actual physical items from what I can see just loads of overly priced downloads for games from either Wii u or 3DS sure that'll please most bought a lot already tho so think ill just save my stars and hope ;)
I would love for Nintendo and SEGA to re-enter the VR race. imagine a virtua boy 2 or a holo-boy with metroid prime 4 3-D and Sega DreamVision with virtual Virtual-On with twinstick controls. It needs to happen. fuck all these bland military shooting galleries.
"Sony was developing The Wand and showing it off in 2002, it was patented then shelved in 2004 because they were unhappy with it and decided to wait until they could get it working properly...Nintendo clearly liked the demos, and decided to borrow it dumbing down the tech and releasing it as if they thought of it..... "
its rejects like this that are responsible for the sad state of the gaming industry, and nintendo doesn't need to steal anything they are the reason the playstation exists. Yeah the move was invented first that's why it was brought out at the end of the ps3's life cycle, and after Nintendo made it popular to begin with hahha. Sony will always be in nintendo's shadow, because they choose to compete with a shady company like microsoft that thinks they has something to do with videogames lol.
This is 100% pure speculation, and the worst kind. No sources, no supposed leaks, just a site fishing for hits. Disgusting that this 100% fabricated rumor passed as news while legit news has mods flagging it for not following unintuitive rules.
Nintendo Fusion incoming...E3 2016 with a huge amount of 3rd party exclusive games and some big 1st party games like F-Zero,Eternal Darkness 2,Pikimin4,Animal Crossing World,Mario Galaxy 3,for 3rd party exclusives think Bayonetta 3,Lego City World,ect ect....
Nintendo are pretty good at ignoring massive trends, so I'm not sure if this will happen. But I think they would be silly not to. VR is actually looking like a real mainstream success story this time around. It's not even being that stupidly priced out of the gate.
Hands up - who would buy a Virtual Boy 2 (or general Nintendo VR unit) if it meant you could play Zelda/Mario/Metroid in VR?
I had a Virtual Boy when I was young. I thought it was great.
MY EYES!
My eyes still hurt to this day