Wii U to be quickly outdated?

[ReservoirAngel]

It's an Ubisoft game, not Nintendo. Their decision to make it. And it got one of the best responses of the entire conference.

Not going to wade into the technical discussion because I'd sound like a moron about it, but I'll agree with this. ZombiU was one of my highlights, not just from Nintendo but from the entire E3. Looks like a zombie game done right.

Then again we've only seem preliminary glances at it so far, but still. Looks awesome.

 

[MetallicaRulez0]

Yea, I wouldn't expect the WiiU to even come close to approaching the sales of the Wii. It doesn't have the same interest level from non-gamers that the Wii had, and gamers will quickly grow tired of owning a completely outdated system (technically all consoles are outdated, but whatever). The success of this console hinges entirely on 2rd party support, which will likely dry up when the next Xbox and PS4 are released down the road. No one wants to make a downgraded version of their game, it's too much work.

Funny how the PS2 sold 150,000,000 consoles yet was the weakest out of the Gamecube, Xbox and PS2. You would think people would have gotten tired of it...

The PS2 was the juggernaut that it was because of 3rd party game support. Seriously, go look at the games catalog for the PS2 compared to the Xbox or Gamecube... it's enormous. Nintendo burned a lot of bridges with the Wii, so I don't expect them to get much support for the WiiU. They can say otherwise all they want, but they know it's true.

 

[ReservoirAngel]

That actually would be really cool... No I'm just saying that they need to retire some of their franchises, and wait for it... make a new IP. I guess Pikmen counts. I am a fan, I loved Mario on the NES/SNES, but honestly whats so "different and innovative" between Mario Galaxy 1 and 2?

Tons of new gameplay features. The basics are the same, but are you really gonna say Mario 64 and Super Mario Galaxy are the same game? Every game doesn't have to be ground breaking. And Nintendo has tons of IPs outside of the big three(Metroid, Zelda, Mario). Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing, Harvest Moon, and so forth.

Harvest Moon is a Nintendo IP, right? I'm not sure.

I'm already looking forward to the WiiU Animal Crossing game. If they make one. And they should.

Yes, I like Animal Crossing. No, I'm not a young girl.

 

[Treblaine]

"The developers will obviously learn how to use the WiiU and this unfamiliarity will cease to be a factor."

And how long will that take? Long enough for a TRUE next generation of consoles from Microsoft or Sony? In the mean time WiiU will struggle from unfamilairity without the benefit of being hugely more powerful like the Xbox 360 was over the original Xbox or the PS2 was over the PS1.

Um, Assassin's Creed 2 for XBox 360 is very typical Xbox 360 game and runs 720p with 2xMSAA. The CoD series may be sub-720p but they run at 60 frames per second which is unusual for the industry. Anyway, Xbox 360 runs Rage with id-tech 4 engine at 720p 4xMSAA and 60-frames per second. 720p is actually very typical for Xbox 360 games, including the following games:
-Dirt 3
-Prince of Persia
-Batman: Arkham City
-Dead Space 2
-Battlefield 3
-Crysis 2

And so on.

Yes, I understand that R700 series includes the 4800 graphics card, but if you hear galloping hooves do you think Horses or Zebra? I think concluding an HD 4800 from such low maximum performance is like hearing zebras when visiting the horse-races. R700 series also includes the very economical and low end HD 4300 and multiple sources point to this being a CPU-GPU single chip design which makes sense if Nintendo have who braincells to rub together when it comes to saving on manufacturing costs. Microsoft does that now and has done that for many years now.

I think it's wishful thinking to conclude HD 4800 graphical prowess from the idea of it being "AMD R7xxx" series which deliberatley hides if it is a high end R770 or very low end R710.

HD 4800 can support resolutions up to 8192 x 8192

WiiU stated capable of Max resolution only up to 1920x1080

HD 4300 can support resolutions up to 1920x1200

That suggests low end graphics card, comparable to Xbox 360 in performance.

And there is still the whole issue of Nintendo's secretiveness. If they have such superior specifications to the Xbox 360, why didn't the mention that in their E3 conference? You know, the last E3 before their new console gets launched?!?

Roumours for months say it will be a tri-core. Nintendo says it is PowerPC, Treblaine assumes it's a tricore.

Rumours for months say it will be an HD 4800 card. Nintendo says it is an AMD card. Treblaine's "source" says it will be a HD 4000 card and says "don't assume anything, it could be a 4300!"

Dat logic. You need to see how insanely biased you are. The card is meant to run at 1080P and 720P, not just output at it. Going by your logic of buying into rumours, it will likely be a 4800 card, by your logic. The 4350 is a media card which pretty much can't run games and for a system builder like yourself, you should know that and you should know that they wouldn't put it in their console. A quad core APU with HD 6000 cores would outpace it and still be dead cheap.

You keep mentioning it being a CPU-GPU chip. If that was the case it could still be pretty powerful, you have seen what trinity will be haven't you?

Once again, I think you can't read. The 4800 has a texture resolution of 8192 x 8192, JUST LIKE THE WIIU GEE FUCKING WHIZ.

The actual 4850 resolution limit is 2560x1600 which isn't supported by televisions so Nintendo has no need to support it either.

I have to say your lack of comprehension is staggering. I mean, can you find me a single sub £10,000 display that can display 8192 x 8192 pixels? No, so I fail to see how you could imagine the 4850 supporting such a resolution. The confirmation bias is strong with this one.

http://www.amd.com/uk/products/desktop/graphics/ati-radeon-hd-4000/hd-4850/Pages/ati-radeon-hd-4850-overview.aspx

About the time to learn to get used the the system. We haven't heard anything about the new consoles and seeing the way it took the PS3 a year and a half to launch after it's E3 reveal, we likely won't see the PS4 until 2014, late 2013 if we are lucky. That's MORE than enough time to get to grips with the WiiU seeing as devkits have been in the wild for over a year.

Well there is no need to take this personally... and especially not to make it personal, but lets look at this a bit deeper considering how any output would be limited by what HDTVs can accept as input. And sorry, it was an honest mistake with the maximum texture-resolution I thought it was output resolution. That's what I get trying to rush a response, I have been bombarded with multiple responses to almost every single one of my posts. But lets look a bit deeper at the output capability.

It's where it said in the source I provided from:

http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1415921/nintendo_wii_u_hardware_tech_specs_revealed.html

"supports 720p 4x MSAA or 1080p rendering in a single pass"

Emphasis mine. This is saying it can do 1080p, but not with any MSAA. That means it's not just limited by the HDTV, once it get up to 1080p it CANNOT also to any anti-aliasing. To get anti-aliasing, it needs to be only 720p. That's the same as on Xbox 360. 360 can do 1080p output but not 1080p output with MSAA.

If it was powerful like HD4800, it would boast being capable of 1080p AND 4xMSAA output. I know HD4800 can output 1080p with up to 8xAA.

Look, my PC has EIGHT cores of x86 architecture, not that Power-PC architecture. 8GB of high speed DDR3 RAM, and a GPU that 2 years ago was classified as a super-computer. THAT is next-gen.

What CPU did you buy and was it for gaming?

Yes, AMD Bulldozer for gaming. Well, I was friends with a guy who runs a PC repair shop and he kind of made a hard sell on me as he really needed a big order to balance the books. I'm very happy with it as It's able to play the games at the high settings I could not before.

And I'd like to reiterate, I don't think Nintendo deserves the benefit of the doubt being this secretive about their console's capability in the E3 event only months before their release. They MUST be more open.

 

[StriderShinryu]

With the DS, and especially the Wii, the Balance Board, every time Nintendo presented a console, the "hardcore" looked at it and exclaimed, "Nintendo is out of its fucking mind. I have absolutely no idea why anyone wold want something like that."

And yet, Nintendo ended up printing money from their creations. I was skeptical each time as well. Now I've deecided that no one here has any idea and that these statements are generally groundless. We'll see if Nintendo pulls another miracle. I've learned that gamer forum-posters have no idea how the market at large will respond, myself included.

I think the issue is that no one is really considering sales as an indicator of quality. Yes, Nintendo can print money with their hardware releases. I don't think anyone is debating that. What is being debated is whether or not the WiiU will actually be a real played in the coming console generation for an extended period of time.

Just as a quick and obvious example. The Escapist is pretty much a gaming focused website. It covers all 3 consoles, plus handhelds, plus PC so it's got a pretty good balance. When, however, was the last time anything of substance was posted here regarding the Wii? When was the time before that? I'm not talking about the fickle forum crowd either, I'm talking about the actual staff. Just because Nintendo sells a lot of consles doesn't necessarily mean they have any real impact on what's going in in gaming outside of providing consumer class technology that the other guys occasionally try to copy.

 

[144_v1legacy]

With the DS, and especially the Wii, the Balance Board, every time Nintendo presented a console, the "hardcore" looked at it and exclaimed, "Nintendo is out of its fucking mind. I have absolutely no idea why anyone wold want something like that."

And yet, Nintendo ended up printing money from their creations. I was skeptical each time as well. Now I've deecided that no one here has any idea and that these statements are generally groundless. We'll see if Nintendo pulls another miracle. I've learned that gamer forum-posters have no idea how the market at large will respond, myself included.

I think the issue is that no one is really considering sales as an indicator of quality. Yes, Nintendo can print money with their hardware releases. I don't think anyone is debating that. What is being debated is whether or not the WiiU will actually be a real played in the coming console generation for an extended period of time.

Just as a quick and obvious example. The Escapist is pretty much a gaming focused website. It covers all 3 consoles, plus handhelds, plus PC so it's got a pretty good balance. When, however, was the last time anything of substance was posted here regarding the Wii? When was the time before that? I'm not talking about the fickle forum crowd either, I'm talking about the actual staff. Just because Nintendo sells a lot of consles doesn't necessarily mean they have any real impact on what's going in in gaming outside of providing consumer class technology that the other guys occasionally try to copy.

That wasn't really the angle I was going at. As far as a company is concerned, profit=success. You can say that Nintendo only succeeded for two years while the other two still thrive, but the fact of the matter is, in business terms, the exchange proved to be worth it. Nintendo made more money in the Wii's early lifetime than the other two made to date. We see it as a dwindle, but from a business standpoint the Wii did exactly what it was supposed to do.

The thread title questions the WiiU's longevity, but I believe that longevity is only as important as the results it provides.

 

[Treblaine]

"Except that we've not yet reached the need or even the ability for graphics to be 10x the power of current consoles."

Then why would anyone buy a WiiU? If they baulk at them being 10x better why would they care about 1.5x better?

Again, who said anything about 1.5x better?

You seem intent on viewing graphics as some inherently exponential progress made through multiples. That's just downright ignorant. We're no longer at the point where graphics advancements can be measured in 2x, 4x or 10x multiples. We've got consoles that can push millions of polygons ever second. The advancements from here on up are in the finer details.

The Wii U has more modern hardware than either the PS3 or Xbox 360. That means that developers will be able to use more modern development tools and tricks to create better visuals. Trying to say it will be 1.5x better or 5x better is just stupid. It will look nicer. Quite probably, when Nintendo gets a grip on the thing, it will look a lot nicer.

You may be of the opinion that Xbox 360 graphics are enough. Well I have been gaming on PC and seeing how far things can go, with the latest rendering technology and I'd say 360 has a lot of room for improvement. Particularly in both high resolution, AND high framerate AND highly detailed worlds, 360 at the moment can offer one of those three but not all at once. Games like Hard Reset are truly unique on PC with the settings maxed.

I'd like graphics to get better. However, I'd like them to get better a) at a rate I can afford, and b) at a rate that doesn't keep escalating development costs and forcing developers to become every more unoriginal and risk-averse.

Being "a step forward" is not enough to make it next gen. The Original Xbox was "a step forward" from the PS2, but it WAS NOT a generation ahead of the PS2. I don't fink you understand even the concept of the term "generation", what separates one generation from another is not being marginally better but FUNDAMENTALLY better.

Actually, the original Xbox was next gen compared to the PS2. It had a built-in hard drive, inbuilt support for an integrated online service, twice the RAM, faster beefier Intel processor, and far heftier GPU. The Xbox was able to use advanced (for the time) pixel shaders and bump mapping to allow for games like Chronicles Of Riddick, Doom 3 and Conker: Live And Reloaded. In terms of raw power and specs, the Xbox not only beat the PS2, it dragged it down a narrow alleyway and kicked a 3 foot dildo up its arse.

Yet the PS2 outsold the Xbox by a factor of 10:1. Funny, that...

Uh, yeah, a much more powerful console will cost much more than the $200 that current gen console are selling for today. What is so surprising about this? Yes, YOU personally may not be able to afford this, likely you couldn't afford the Xbox 360 when it launched for $400 in 2005. And it would be $500 today with inflation. Deal with it. People bought the PS3 back in 2007 when it was $500-600.

Comparatively very few people, and it took Sony some massive price-cuts and a redesign of the console to actually get the thing to start selling. When it first appeared on the shelves, it looked like it was going to flop. Seriously, it looked like Sony had completely shot themselves in the foot.

And again, the PS3 released before the world economy went to shit, and people started being made unemployed all over the world. The PS3 struggled to sell in its first year, and that was with the world economy still riding high on a boom. How in the fuck can Sony sell a $500 today when spending is down, the cost of living is up, and people in general have less money to spend on luxury goods? Here in the UK, we're back in recession. Meaning people don't have money to buy shit. Good luck to Sony if they plan on selling a £400 console here.

"The advancements from here on up are in the finer details."

What? No.

You can see this with the capability of PC gaming with hardware 10x as powerful giving really tangibly improved game worlds.

"1.5x better" is an arbitrary and rough number, not absolute.

WiiU will still be WAY behind the current state of PC gaming, and will easily be lapped by any true next-gen system.

You should get into PC gaming, there is room in there for from the small indie developer to the big monoliths and every range of graphical capability and spend as much or as little on PC gaming hardware and then upgrade bit by bit affordable.

But you have to realise the madness of console edging forward in capability bit by bit, where you can't adjust settings and upgrade discrete components. The console generations work for a reason to prevent overlap and redundancy. To really move forward consoles you'd have to buy way more systems than you'd have to. A "little bit more powerful console" only delays the inevitable. Better to stay with current gen graphics and save up longer for when a truly next-gen system comes out.

" Actually, the original Xbox was next gen compared to the PS2. "


That is not what a new console generation is. If you want something that is a "little bit" more powerful and capable, then get into PC gaming. Because what you are talking about isn't generations, it's continuous incremental improvement which WORKS on PC because you have variable settings and discrete components.

Yeah, to a completely amateur it "looked like" Sony had shot themselves in the foot launching the PS3, but the actual industry experts like Pachter weren't worried and they knew they'd be sitting pretty like they are today while Wii shot their wad with some quick and easy casual money while Sony built a loyal PS3 base.

And please, stop going on about the world economy. You are desperate to drop several hundred dollars on a system that is only marginally more powerful than current gen consoles, yet object to hardware that is TRULY a generation ahead. Do you want that? Graphical capability 10x what you have gotten bored with? How about the fidelity of Uncharted 2 in full 1080p with the high framerate of Call of Duty and particle effects and reflection with lustre like you've only seen in pre-animated movies.

 

[Fumbles]

That actually would be really cool... No I'm just saying that they need to retire some of their franchises, and wait for it... make a new IP. I guess Pikmen counts. I am a fan, I loved Mario on the NES/SNES, but honestly whats so "different and innovative" between Mario Galaxy 1 and 2?

Tons of new gameplay features. The basics are the same, but are you really gonna say Mario 64 and Super Mario Galaxy are the same game? Every game doesn't have to be ground breaking. And Nintendo has tons of IPs outside of the big three(Metroid, Zelda, Mario). Fire Emblem, Pokemon, Animal Crossing, Harvest Moon, and so forth.

Harvest Moon is a Nintendo IP, right? I'm not sure.

I think Harvest Moon is. To me whats funny is that they ignore the one series that really captivated most fans (atleast from my experience) Megaman. Yes I know that it is a Capcom title, but it single handedly made the NES/SNES great for my childhood.

I have never been a Pokemon fan, but are the games really that different?

 

[MrHide-Patten]

I want the Wii-U to fail so hard it makes Nintendo pull their finger out, or at least fail so hard that Microsoft and Sony stop copying their stupid business practice.

The success of the Wii was a fad, an accident. Right place, right time. As someone has already said the casual Marketa now has plenty of other venues to meet their tastes. Playing tennis in front of your telly is going to enthrall the casual demographic, but god knows they've already got tablets galore. Made by companies who have much more successful markets.

If their business practices are so terrible, why do so many countless hordes of people love them to death?

Alas if only it were to death. Then they might restrain themselves. Seriously they slap Mario on the box and people will throw their money at it regardless of quality, it COD for kiddies.
They've got the cash and rabid fan base to produce innovation but they never use it. The most innovative game they've contributed in was Metroid Other M, which only seemed to excel in Misogynism.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

I want the Wii-U to fail so hard it makes Nintendo pull their finger out, or at least fail so hard that Microsoft and Sony stop copying their stupid business practice.

The success of the Wii was a fad, an accident. Right place, right time. As someone has already said the casual Marketa now has plenty of other venues to meet their tastes. Playing tennis in front of your telly is going to enthrall the casual demographic, but god knows they've already got tablets galore. Made by companies who have much more successful markets.

Right place + right time + right market = accident? OF COURSE!

I think Nintendo can do what they like, if they make money, then go for it.

I fully agree, they've got the surplus and hubris to fail so I say let them. Being too big to fail is like to being too fat to diet.

 

[DracoSuave]

Didn't this console generation's sales prove that technical specs are NOT what gets video game consoles into homes?

Gotta have a little more faith in Nintendo, they do kinda have a clue what they're doing in the 'let's print money' game.

I'm not saying the WiiU is a great system; I'm not saying I want it. I'm saying that Nintendo has found ways to make things people DO want. It's like car sales, it's not the cars with the best engines that sell the most units. Tech Specs don't sell units. At the end of the day, consoles are toys and Nintendo has rightfully figured out that selling their systems based on "How can people play with this toy?" is the best way to get their little strangely shaped boxes into your house.

 

[Treblaine]

Yes, I do see what you mean about the 1080P with no AA vs 720P with AA. Something is up there as like you said, the 4800 should be able to deal with that just fine. Maybe Nintendo are going to go full on cheap, but looking at consumer hardware, I see no reason to. I mean, they could fire in a trinity APU and get current gen quality for cheap (especially as they get a bulk discount on parts) and it would give then a pseudo-quad core chip. Either the source isn't being clear or the specs are different. That being said, seeing as the Wii was essentially a gamecube I could see them doing it, it would just be a fucking stupid maneuver.

I'm just going to wait until we get something official as something isn't right here. It could be as you said (though with less hyperbole), something lower down in the 4XXX series though as I said, it would be idiotic if they hope to bring in the (uuurgh) hardcore market. I do see your point about them being secretive as valid though I ask this, how long were the specs for the big consoles kept secret for last generation?

Now, off topic. How is bulldozer? I know it got trashed in official reviews but the user reviews on websites seem praise worthy. Have you or will you overclock it? I hear it overclocks very well.

I understand that Nintendo are not in a position to build powerful systems for a low price quite like Sony can which is a much large company with more fingers in more pies. Nintendo are a comparatively small company, they have two products: wii and 3DS (DS is virtually retired). While Sony has a Bravia Television/speakers, Vaio computers, Mobile-phones, MP3 players, Cameras, Several Movie Studios, Music recording business, even their own private bank!

Nintendo would really struggle to get a highly graphics into their device without the price going through the roof. I don't think Nintendo has the clout like Sony or Microsoft (we know how poerful they are) to get the WiiU with high specs at low price. I just don't see how they can beat Sony and Microsoft going head to head in the HD console game. Who knows, maybe they have some ingenious design but Microsoft jsut seem to have mastered it wit hthe xbox 360 getting such good bang for very little buck.

I know I sound like a broken record, but check out John Carmack's opinion on Xbox 360, even though PC is his platform of choice he heaps praise on how Microsoft does do consoles, from his coding perspective. He loved the support that they give and how he can access the 360's capability.


I know, an hour and a half. You don't have to watch it if you haven't aready, but anyone else reading this I really recommend it.

(if only the guys who designed the gameplay were as brilliant as the guy who coded the engine)

I hate to see Nintendo go head to head against this. Wii may have bought in with a fickle casual market but it stood a chance there.

Looking back, Gamecube saved money in interesting areas. It didn't have a DVD drive when DVD drives were expensive, but they used the underlying technology at much lower cost - essentially mini-DVDs - that had certain benefits. It also didn't even attempt any kind of network or internal storage. it was the most "pure" gaming console of the generation. PS2's price was inflated by how it had to pay DVD forum to licence the right to play DVD movies. Impossible on Gamecube. Of course, that's not so expensive now, DVD forum licences DVD technology much cheaper.

But I remember how I justified buying a PS2 because "it's not just $300 for a console, it's also a DVD player!" while gamecube struggled to sell at $99. What a bargain price. I bought a gamecube way WAY late in the cycle (PS: I live in UK now, but now when gamecube came out).

Bulldozer's great. Especially in parallel stuff. The thing is, it may not be able to render video as fast as some intel stuff, but it can render TWO videos at the same time almost as fast as intel's sandybridge can render one. You know what it's like, it's like having two okay quad-core CPUs. Which is REALLY great if you are trying to live-record gameplay and don't want stutter. in this case it is a GOOD thing that most programs don't try to use more than 4 cores, as you can run multiple at the same time without stepping on each other's toes.

But don't mistake my experience for expertise. If I could give a crude but (not so) relatable example: bulldozer is the AK47 of CPUs. It's cheaper and slower and nastier but it can just take so much grit and keep on chugging. it's not fast but importantly, it's never slow. Which is exactly what I want for my gaming needs, I want NO stutter, not 15% faster. But that's just my, subjective experience.

Any time I've considered overclocking I've been convinced to upgrade instead. Yeah, my PC Repair shop friend buys and sells so much off me, my computer is in his shop right now... hmm, wonder if he's doing anything to it?

 

[00slash00]

last year i thought the WiiU looked amazingly stupid. this year im actually thinking of getting one. it looks like its actually going to have real games, unlike the wii. but of course it doesnt look much better than ps3 or 360 games. it takes developers years to be able to really unlock a consoles full potential. remember when the 360 was first unveiled? it didnt look much better than xbox graphics. right now i am cautiously optimistic about the WiiU

 

[Grygor]

Harvest Moon is a Nintendo IP, right? I'm not sure.

I think Harvest Moon is.

Nope. Harvest Moon is owned by Marvelous. Which is why so many games in the franchise have appeared on Sony systems.

 

[Pandabearparade]

I wish Nintendo the best of luck, but I won't be getting a Wii U unless Elder Scrolls 6 or Fallout 4 turn out to be Wii U exclusive. They just haven't impressed me at all with the controller gimmicks, and I don't see the point buying a shiny new box that is more or less able to run the same things my PS3 does.