@welshbloke: As JoshuaJSlone said, adding a camera to the DS does not dramatically change the DS. Adding HD support isn't as easy as adding a camera either.
Also, the Wii has been attracting some core games. CoD5 is coming to the Wii, Disaster looks like it'll be a good core game, Sin and Punishment from Nintendo is another good core game. No More Heroes 2 was announced at TGS, the list goes on. Nintendo has said they have the next Zelda, Mario, etc games coming, they just take time. Not to mention the ever present rumor of a Kid Icarus, and other such games. If all these games don't attract a good portion of core gamers, then I doubt a HD Wii in 2 years will. Maybe the very hardcore gamers will still go with the HD consoles, but since these types of gamers are the minority, Nintendo can afford to wait a generation to really grab these gamers.
@kspraydad: If most WiiHD games play on the Wii (a smart thing to do since I doubt many current Wii owners will upgrade to the new WiiHD), then it'd be pointless to have the WiiHD in the first place. And since any game that can be played on the Wii won't be made in HD, on the HD it'll look just as bad as current Wii games do on large HDTVs, rendering the WiiHD pointless. Finally, if companies make two versions of the games, one that is in HD and one that's not, then it makes the WiiHD a new console, and not on extended version of one console, like the DSi is/will be.
Handhelds go through minor upgrades more often and work better because they're cheaper and people probably like getting new ones every now and then, since handhelds tend to break more, since you rough house them more. Unless of course you have that portable Wii screen and battery thing...
@Joe80: I have no real evidence to support what consoles were more powerful than any other, especially since power is such a relative term (hard numbers like processor speed are not direct representations of the true potential and such). Wikipedia gives a good amount of detail on the consoles, but I always take Wiki with a bit of caution. From discussions on other forums (notably VGChartz), the topic of power has come up numerous times, and it's usually stated that the least powerful console wins every generation. As for the computer comparison, the best evidence (and again... I take it with caution since its Wikipedia) is this, which if you look under the 32 bit processors, they were first brought into the market (by Intel) in 1981, and had a speed of 8MHz. This was 2 years before the 8-bit 1.79 MHz NES came out (according to this). And 32 bit is much faster than 8 bit, so the power difference there is rather large (though I cannot give a percentage).
Though I do think Nintendo could claim some core gamers with HD... I just don't think that is the end all way to get there.
Though I think I'll agree to disagree... since I've forgotten exactly what we were disagreeing on. ;)
I was more worried that Pachter was convinced that an HD Wii was coming because it would help attract more core gamers, when I really think more core games are needed to attract core gamers... And since you don't need HD to have core games, I see no reason to sell 60 million Wiis (if WiiHD comes at the end of 2009 that'll be about the total sales of the current Wii), and then be like "HD! Woot!" If it comes much later than that... well they'll have to do more than just add HD because the next generation will be coming up soon and you don't want to constantly tell consumers they need to upgrade to get the most out of the games, and we all know Sony and Microsoft are going to be coming at Nintendo with a vengeance... Look at Sega - too many consoles in too short of a time doesn't help.
Of course... that's what I think. And since I don't run Nintendo (or anything else for that matter), I cannot say they will or won't do it (anymore than Pachter can), though I don't think they will, and I don't think they should either.
2
@welshbloke: As JoshuaJSlone said, adding a camera to the DS does not dramatically change the DS. Adding HD support isn't as easy as adding a camera either.
Also, the Wii has been attracting some core games. CoD5 is coming to the Wii, Disaster looks like it'll be a good core game, Sin and Punishment from Nintendo is another good core game. No More Heroes 2 was announced at TGS, the list goes on. Nintendo has said they have the next Zelda, Mario, etc games coming, they just take time. Not to mention the ever present rumor of a Kid Icarus, and other such games. If all these games don't attract a good portion of core gamers, then I doubt a HD Wii in 2 years will. Maybe the very hardcore gamers will still go with the HD consoles, but since these types of gamers are the minority, Nintendo can afford to wait a generation to really grab these gamers.
@kspraydad: If most WiiHD games play on the Wii (a smart thing to do since I doubt many current Wii owners will upgrade to the new WiiHD), then it'd be pointless to have the WiiHD in the first place. And since any game that can be played on the Wii won't be made in HD, on the HD it'll look just as bad as current Wii games do on large HDTVs, rendering the WiiHD pointless. Finally, if companies make two versions of the games, one that is in HD and one that's not, then it makes the WiiHD a new console, and not on extended version of one console, like the DSi is/will be.
Handhelds go through minor upgrades more often and work better because they're cheaper and people probably like getting new ones every now and then, since handhelds tend to break more, since you rough house them more. Unless of course you have that portable Wii screen and battery thing...
@Joe80: I have no real evidence to support what consoles were more powerful than any other, especially since power is such a relative term (hard numbers like processor speed are not direct representations of the true potential and such). Wikipedia gives a good amount of detail on the consoles, but I always take Wiki with a bit of caution. From discussions on other forums (notably VGChartz), the topic of power has come up numerous times, and it's usually stated that the least powerful console wins every generation. As for the computer comparison, the best evidence (and again... I take it with caution since its Wikipedia) is this, which if you look under the 32 bit processors, they were first brought into the market (by Intel) in 1981, and had a speed of 8MHz. This was 2 years before the 8-bit 1.79 MHz NES came out (according to this). And 32 bit is much faster than 8 bit, so the power difference there is rather large (though I cannot give a percentage).
Though I do think Nintendo could claim some core gamers with HD... I just don't think that is the end all way to get there.
Though I think I'll agree to disagree... since I've forgotten exactly what we were disagreeing on. ;)
I was more worried that Pachter was convinced that an HD Wii was coming because it would help attract more core gamers, when I really think more core games are needed to attract core gamers... And since you don't need HD to have core games, I see no reason to sell 60 million Wiis (if WiiHD comes at the end of 2009 that'll be about the total sales of the current Wii), and then be like "HD! Woot!" If it comes much later than that... well they'll have to do more than just add HD because the next generation will be coming up soon and you don't want to constantly tell consumers they need to upgrade to get the most out of the games, and we all know Sony and Microsoft are going to be coming at Nintendo with a vengeance... Look at Sega - too many consoles in too short of a time doesn't help.
Of course... that's what I think. And since I don't run Nintendo (or anything else for that matter), I cannot say they will or won't do it (anymore than Pachter can), though I don't think they will, and I don't think they should either.
P.S. Yes... I do write papers. Long, long papers.