Nintendo Won't Release a Wii Successor Soon

Nintendo of America president Reggie Fils-Aime has again answered negatively to questions suggesting that Nintendo might bring out a successor to the Wii more quickly than the average console life cycle.

"We believe the role of a new console, a new system, is to bring great new entertainment ideas to life. We launched those systems when we had great ideas that would benefit either from a touch screen or from a Wii remote," explained Fils-Aime to Reuters as noticed by CVG.

"We will consider the launch of new consoles when we have got great new entertaining ideas that can only be done with a new console," the executive elaborated. "As we sit here today the Wii console has a long run ahead of it," he added.

To say the Wii "has a long run ahead" is a vast understatement. The remote-waggling miracle box is still dominating hardware sales and Nintendo's own Wii software is flying off retail shelves as well, with Nintendo taking three of October's top 10 console games in North American sales charts.

For Nintendo hardware collectors itching to give the House of Mario their cash, Reggie did have some comforting news: "At some point we will launch the DSi here in the Americas." The updated version of the DS handheld is expected after April 2009.

Filed Under
From The Chatty
  • reply
    November 14, 2008 8:36 PM

    I would actually prefer that console makers increase the time in-between iterations. It forces game developers to provide increased "impact" through gameplay, and not just graphics (not to say that good graphics are unneeded, but I'd MUCH rather have a fun game than a pretty one).

    • reply
      November 14, 2008 9:07 PM

      Agreed. Also making these developers develop a new engine every 2 games isn't allowing them to focus on the content.

      • reply
        November 14, 2008 9:14 PM

        I like the update in technology, but you guys are right also. In these lean economic times, I think people want more bang for their buck. Maybe have that console last a little bit more and just get a couple more games before upgrading.

        • reply
          November 14, 2008 9:17 PM

          Yep. Longer time between iterations will hopefully also force hardware manufacturers to, I don't know, put higher quality components in? There is NO reason a $300 system should break as easily as the 360 does.

          • reply
            November 15, 2008 7:09 AM

            PS3s don't break more than Wiis do.

        • reply
          November 14, 2008 10:25 PM

          I can't argue about the current economic problems. It is just prudent to conserve cash and spend wiser. But as a PC guy I hope long time between hardware updates stays in the console world.

          • reply
            November 15, 2008 9:37 AM

            you like to spend $500 on your computer every year?

            • reply
              November 15, 2008 9:49 AM

              $200 for a graphics upgrade every 2 years is not that bad. You don't need the latest and greatest. Nvidia's 8800 series cards are 1.5 - 2 years old and one of those will do you just fine.

              • reply
                November 15, 2008 10:54 AM

                Don't bother explaining and relaying facts to the extremely ignorant anti-PC comments. If they are that far misinformed your advice must sound like voodoo to them.

      • reply
        November 14, 2008 10:08 PM

        Yeah, it would probably make game development a bit cheaper so they hopefully wouldn't have to do things like in-game ads.

      • reply
        November 16, 2008 12:32 AM

        I somewhat agree in general but with Nintendo specifically, almost nobody is releasing any good games for the Wii, engine re-writes or not, apparently because the hardware is so underpowered and/or the people who have bought them don't actually buy games.

    • reply
      November 14, 2008 10:22 PM

      5 years isn't long enough? You don't want new hardware until 7 or 8 years?

      • reply
        November 14, 2008 11:18 PM

        remember it takes a LONG time to develop an engine. ID takes about 5 years between game releases, figure 2 years on engine and a few years on content.

        • reply
          November 15, 2008 3:42 AM

          Thankfully 5 years isn't the norm yet, but 3 years is standard now, leaning forward to 4 years. But we're only speaking about big games here; many more good games take less than that. Not every game need to be Doom3, Zelda, or Oblivion.

          • reply
            November 15, 2008 7:01 AM

            not every game makes their own engines to, a lot license out the tech and just worry about content

    • reply
      November 15, 2008 4:31 AM

      agreed as well.

      For instance I felt that Xbox 1 still had plenty of life left in it and was able to render some pretty nice visuals

    • reply
      November 15, 2008 7:19 AM

      Yeah but Wii graphics was shitty before it even released.

      • reply
        November 15, 2008 11:23 AM

        "We believe the role of a new console, a new system, is to bring great new entertainment ideas to life. We launched those systems when we had great ideas that would benefit either from a touch screen or from a Wii remote"

        I think this quote and the Wii's graphics capability make it pretty obvious that Nintendo doesn't consider graphics a high priority and reason enough to come out with a new system.

        • reply
          November 16, 2008 12:29 AM

          Or new games or that matter. :-(

    • reply
      November 16, 2008 1:33 PM

      Yep, and the longer between generations also means you get more bang for your console buck. The PS2 was and is a fantastic value given how long it lived and how many great games it has. 360 and PS3 are shaping up to be similar, I just hope neither console maker pulls an "original xbox"

Hello, Meet Lola