Honey Bunny
Member
Don't try it. Wii U had ninty fans trying to hype up every mediocre shitpile game that released on it, i.e. the two they got a month. I know how this felt as a Vita owner.
Don't try it. Wii U had ninty fans trying to hype up every mediocre shitpile game that released on it, i.e. the two they got a month. I know how this felt as a Vita owner.
CPU wise it has a horrible bottleneck, having basically the same Wii CPU overcloked (which was originally the GCN´s CPU on steroids) and with 2 additional cores...But at the same time, Wii U has better/more modern GPU and RAM than PS360.Was the WiiU slightly more powerful than the XBOX 360/PS3 as the video suggests?
I still miss Miiverse. That was a lot of fun, for a single player who's not online a lot like me.Not only does it have many bangers, but Nintendo, for the first time, went all out with online features and packed the fucker with tons of cool applications and personality.
just think of Xbox 360 but with more ram.Was the WiiU slightly more powerful than the XBOX 360/PS3 as the video suggests?
No way. The Wii U has an old gen cpu. the company synthesized three Wii cpu cores at a clock speed three times lower than the Xbox 360's, so in addition to a lower IPC, there's also a lower clock speed. This means the difference is too large as the xbox series X cpu and xbox one cpu,Was the WiiU slightly more powerful than the XBOX 360/PS3 as the video suggests?
You're wrong, but I won't go into details because you like the games mentioned. To summarize, you don't compare different games or art direction (which in the Nintendo dictionary means cartoon game) because in this case you will be comparing the developer's skills. The correct way is to compare FPS, resolution, and detail measurements in identical games, and for games that demand a lot of cpu, all three elements I mentioned are sacrificed on the Wii U. And if the game doesn't use much cpu, then the competition is over gpu, and in that case, games released for both suggest equality. This means that any Wii U game could be the same on the 360, in fact, the 360 could improve the game in question.So, in theory it should be slightly more powerful, i guess. At least i coudn´t see any Kart Racer or Plattformer on PS360 looking better or at least equal to Mario Kart 8 and Super Mario 3D World. But, of course, Nintendo are masters on art direction and taking their systems beyond their limits. In other hand Zelda BOTW has an impressive art, beyond Wii U´s limitations, but also it has physics and a living/breathing world beyond anything i´ve seen on PS360, and even surpassing some PS4/One games with better graphics and resolution.
Or could i be wrong?
I don't agree with him that every game was shit, but I do agree with him about looking at the Wii U like a PS Vita and people overhyping some Wii U titles (including NSMBU and Starfox, which I distinctly remember people shitting on both especially the latter).Yes those shot pile games like MK8, smash bros, new super Mario bros, Zelda botw, and DKC tropical freeze .![]()
The problem as that they were just posts of games that people could play on the systems they already owned tha did not look any better and had a couple of tacked on Gamepad features. They needed to be reasons to upgrade to the console and not me too releases.At launch (or soon after), didnt Wii U have some popular games like COD, EA Sports, Batman, AC, Mass Effect? Same hit games as 360 and PS3. So Ninty and third parties tried. And from what I remember they were just as good
You can easily bypass a fucked nand with softmod booted off a pi Pico.Better than you remember? Well, I don't know, mine's a brick with a corrupted NAND (like millions of others), thanks Nintendo.
They did improve the speed of the home menu over time, but it was still pretty sluggish. The Switch's home screen is a night and day difference in terms of response time.WiiU is the proof that great games cannot save a failed concept - Good lord, WiiU's operating system is one of the slowest software i had the 'not pleasure' of use! I like to imagine how the same system would be better (or at least cheaper, of course) without the second screen (for the sake of 'what if' scenarios, let's imagine the Swich would be released regardles of WiiU game pad).
Wii U was, as a user, a great concept very badly executed. So badly executed that Nintendo removed any semblance of soul in their systems from then on.Yep. Iwata was so wrong about "all it takes is one game".
WiiU had many excellent games, but the press and the gaming community united were hell-bent on shitting on every good thing it did manage to do anyway (remember the 7/10 to Tropical Freeze?). And almost all big third-party devs weren't going to waste a second developing for it, not even porting PS360 games which would have been quite easy.
The system was horribly slow and having to use the GamePad for some functions was a bad decision, but the library was worth it.
I've never had couch multiplayer sessions with my friends again with a game like Nintendo Land.
They barely did nothing, best they did was trying to give a quick start menu to deeplink into a feature and preload more intelligently.They did improve the speed of the home menu over time, but it was still pretty sluggish.
Well, it has a lot of resources available and basically no feature. Bunch of tiles and flavourless menus.The Switch's home screen is a night and day difference in terms of response time.
Yes to everything but the Odyssey comment.prefer weird Wii-U (+3ds) era Nintendo to Switch era by a mile, actually
Miiverse was fun and different. Nintendoland was actually a fantastic family game, probably the most fun we had on local multiplayer with the kids to date. 3D World was better than Odyssey. And in general I love the way it didn't feel like other consoles.
oh and second-screen for inventories (like the GC Zelda remakes) and maps was perfect, actually a great idea that we've lost
I think Nintendo learned their lessons with the Wii U and wanted a simple speedy home menu, which I am glad they stuck with on the Switch 2, with of course some minor changes and a resolution bump.They barely did nothing, best they did was trying to give a quick start menu to deeplink into a feature and preload more intelligently.
Well, it has a lot of resources available and basically no feature. Bunch of tiles and flavourless menus.
Not sure why we cherish them stripping things away for not being able to compete with something like the Blades UI (Xbox 360 dedicated OS footprint was ~32 MB of RAM and small percentage of CPU and GPU time for a mic mic older architecture).
It feels like talking to a wall here hehe. Nintendo saw the bitching and moaning and just stripped off all features to make it simple on them to achieve a snappier UI, boasted about it, and people to this day that it as an achievement that with far better HW they achieved less than what the Xbox 360, heck the Wii, did with far less.I think Nintendo learned their lessons with the Wii U and wanted a simple speedy home menu, which I am glad they stuck with on the Switch 2, with of course some minor changes and a resolution bump.
No they were not pretty decent, it was smokes and mirrors trying to hide the loading. It was like adding an elevator in a game to make you busy wait… not the same exactly but along those lines.The upgrades on the Wii U home menu speed were pretty decent to be honest, but improving something that took ages to swap between apps/games, to even half the time will still be slow.