Nintendo XL(possible spelling error)

When I was signing up for the Unity Collaborate Beta, I saw that in the list of platforms to develop for there was the Nintendo XL. As far as I know there is no system called Nintendo XL but there is the 3ds XL and the NX. Is this just missing the 3ds part or is it the NX?

 

I bet it's NX as 3ds xl is mentioned a little bit above. Or maybe we don't know something?

 

The New Nintendo 3DS XL is listed above, but not the standard 3DS XL.

 

This is why I thought that it may just be missing the 3ds part

 

Since we're somewhat on topic, it's a shame the Wii U didn't succeed. It's been my favorite console thus far ever made.

 

Unity reserves the right to deploy to platforms that don't actually exist.

It's in the EULA cross platform is everything.

 

The only way Nintendo will ever make a major mark is the day they make A) Controls made for hardcore gaming, and B) Allow Hardcore games to be put on their system, C) - Compete with PS4/Xbox Live and D) don't be focused on a single niche (children).

 

Newsflash. Nintendo already has made their mark. Hardcore gaming is not the biggest or most lucrative segment of the market.

Check out the list. Nintendo is right up there.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_game_consoles

 

I know Nintendo was obviously the biggest thing in the past, I can't answer for any of the hand helds besides Game Boy Advanced and below, but the Wii U, has like hardly anything but children games. Which is why I said what I said, yes it is the best in tops of children games, but if they want hard core gamers they need to quit releasing children games, at least back in the day they allowed at the time 'M' rated games, today it's all K/A (kids or adults). Of course you see the occasional scary game, but you don't see anything like Alien Isolation on it. I mean me personally I love the Wii U, but don't play it for the lack of games outside of Childrens games.

It may have sold more units than all the others because it's obviously older and has released much more stuff before any other modern (from PSX) and up.

But then again, they wouldn't be on the verge of bankruptcy (from all the things I read at least - I hope they don't, but I keep hearing they might close the doors on consoles at least). But nevertheless, if you go to some gaming championship, all Nintendo systems are shut out and aren't taken seriously, I really wish Nintendo would be taken seriously (in today's gaming). I mean I know it's the ultimate thing for Children and Adults for Casual fun gaming, but outside of that you have as mentioned the occasional scary game, but without blood and guts everywhere, at least I haven't seen one except that one Zombie U game or whatever, and that's the only one. The only other FPS that looks even slightly interesting is Splatoon nor whatever it's called, but then again, nothing besides a children's game.

Long story short, devs should actually put the games we play on Xbox and PS4 and PC onto the Wii U or any other system they decide to make.

I'm not arguing that Nintendo hasn't made a mark (in the past), but today it's just another system that doesn't wow the hardcore gamer, only the casual game - which there's nothing wrong with that, but they would get way more clientele if they would just open the doors to a variety of assortments of games, not just mainly casual. Unless it's the devs not wanting to touch the Wii U for hardcore gaming, which if that's the case, then it must be something to do with the hardware as to why none of these big massive AAA games such as Battlefield 4 went to everything but the Wii U. Same with Saints Row, Same with Dead island riptide, so either they just don't want to put it on the Wii U for not so good system specs, or I could only think Nintendo doesn't want Violent games.

Again, I love the Wii U and Nintendo, and there's nothing wrong with wanting to support mainly casual gaming or even childrens gaming, but they would do more business if they just had these games that release on everything else but the Wii U.

 

Played Splatoon?

I know it's different, but I'd wager that the Wii U's controls are as good as a keyboard and mouse in regards to that style of game. It gets both the accuracy and the speed, which is where gamepad controls fall short in my opinion (you can have one or the other, not both), and I wasn't picking up on any latency.

Plus, in my limited experience the game plays as fast and hard as other similarly scaled FPSs. It's just not marketed as being "hardcore". It's marketed as being "fun" because that's what Nintendo does.

The main difference is that it's not a violent, masculine gore fest aimed at people who want to feel like badasses.

Being "family friendly" isn't the same as focusing on children. Their games are less violent than the competition and they don't focus on realistic graphics. Those things give their products a broader appeal that includes children, but it isn't necessarily focused on them.

Also, take note that some of their biggest success with the Wii came from the Wii Fit, which practically spawned a whole new market segment in its own right and despite being "family friendly" isn't really attractive to children at all.[/QUOTE]

 

I agree with @BoredMormon that you're putting way too much focus on this. Hardcore gamers aren't the whole market, or even the main part of the market, and plenty of Nintendo's success has come specifically from being different to its major competitors who do focus on that market segment.

If Nintendo were to start trying to compete for the CoD crowd then they'd alienate many of the people who do like them (who might be looking for gaming experiences without the stuff you're calling "hardcore") at the same time as trying to compete for a share of a market that's already well tied up. Where is the sense in that? I understand that it fits better with your idea of what makes a great gaming experience, and I'll say right now that I've also never even owned a Nintendo, but to suggest that they're doing something inferior or wrong or that they need to change just because they're targeting people who aren't like us is misguided at best.

 

Plus, they need to keep a great relationship between third party.

Apart from this, how is PSVR different from standard PS4 platform?
Isn't that just like oculus rift with PC?

 

No. It's affordable.

 

Mathf.Abs(($400 PSVR+tracker price)-rift price) == not very much
In case of development kit, == will be replaced by something else

 

Aren't you forgetting the cost of the system required to use the headset? A PlayStation 4 is only about $350 whereas a system capable of driving an Oculus Rift is significantly more expensive. Just the graphics card itself is about $300.

 

Yeah, this is what my mind jumped to when you mentioned "affordable".

Plus, lots of people have PS4s that wouldn't need upgrading. Lots of people who have PCs would still have to upgrade them.

 

You should prepare yourself to expect the unexpected, always.