Bush is correct - Wii hardware cannot support HD, no matter the software or firmware running on it.

Further, the way the Wii is set up, firmware updates don't affect games. They kind of painted themselves into a corner. Games cannot be patched, nor features added. Even if they wanted to, they couldn't, say, add voice support to games like Mario Kart.

I for one am pretty excited for the new whatever it is that Nintendo is coming out with. I pretty much jumped past owning a wii or any of the consoles for consecutive periods of time, but the Wii especially. I always thought that the motion controls weren't as good as they could have been and that people enjoyed playing wii sports to really look at other games for it. Granted, I did enjoy Super Mario Galaxy immensely and I always wanted to play some of the other games but everyone is right, HD is where it's at this generation and when you only have 480p it's a problem. Hell, my original (now 10 year old xbox) can do 480p...

Also, the gamecube was a decent bit more powerful than the ps2 and only slightly less powerful than the xbox. There are many games that still look great on it compared to wii games even.

That could be a good thing though, they could be putting themselves in their own market. Why compete with Sony and Microsoft when you can put out a system by itself ahead of time, and sell a crap-ton of systems before the other guys come out with their new systems? And knowing Nintendo, they're gonna build this thing as inexpensive as possible so they can sell it as inexpensively as possible. Personally, I think it would be a good move.

Are you sure you don't mean, 'build it as inexpensively as possible so they can sell it at as large of a markup as possible'?

Knowing Nintendo, it's going to be just powerful enough to comfortably support whatever they add to it as cheap as possible. Getting it out a year or two early is a smokescreen to make up for the fact that the Wii is outdated, and they can manufacture them at rock-bottom prices once chip manufacturers have a CPU fire sale after they've been superseded by new designs.

ha ha ha and I still wont mod the thing. I have had one in my room all year before I moved, I didn't want to do any thing with it.

just wanted to point out that the gamecube was not very far behind the original xbox in terms of graphical power. the ps2 was by far the weaker console in that cycle unless you count the dreamcast, but some games looked better on the DC

+1 to triton. I never understood why people said that, the GC had beautiful games IMO.

Double post, but this article has more details than before; 3-core PPC, ATI R700 based series gpu (HD4000 series, lets hope its been customized a bit), controller has 6in HD touchscreen with cameras, and standard game controls. Obviously unconfirmed.

I really doubt the concept of having a screen on the controllers. Too useless and too expensive, especially if it is touchscreen and a decent size. It would add weight and drain the batteries more. Also, if it is any sort of motion control (as I believe it will be), a screen on the controller makes even less sense.

I'm thinking some general improvements in a logical jump, nothing too crazy. Think DSi -> 3DS. Hardware improvements, but same general concept and layout, and also backwards compatible.

if they want to recapture the hardcore market, they will do something more subtle than the wii again.

So now the article says it's going to be a 360 with an upgraded GPU?



Didn't they try that with the GBA and GameCube, and maybe three games ever actually supported it? They could do something similar with the 3DS/WiiHD, but it would only be necessary in a limited game range (card games and digitized board games) and it would require each player to have a $250 handheld.

Just because they have similar architecture means nothing. For all we know it could have a much more powerful PPC cpu. There were tons of games that supported GC/GBA link, and it should be similar to a VMU in practice I think. The link function was more for linking games together than the second screen feature. Also, I'm fairly certain they wouldn't make a controller that costs $250. You are being very unrealistic. I honestly wouldn't imagine it costing much more than controllers do now, otherwise no one would buy them. Additionally, screens are very very cheap these days. I wish you guys would have an open mind about this; it hasn't even actually been announced.

There's this thing called being realistic.

A $250 controller is not realistic.