-Pyromaniac-
Member
that's because nothing can ruin the beautifulness of Stella.
Wii U Speculation Thread of Brains Beware: Wii U Re-Unveiling At E3 2012
- Thread starter bgassassin
- Start date
- Status
bgassassin
Member
It's ok guys, I'm still leaning towards going back to team nintendo for a generation, or at least for half the generation until Sony builds up a library for the PS4
You're good. But that mentality is definitely out there and there will be glorious meltdowns if Sony and MS don't live up to "those" expectations. I see myself being similar to EatChildren in focusing on Wii U and PC so what the others do don't really matter that much to me from a tech standpoint. So I'd like to see things happen that way just for the meltdowns.
Proelite
Member
Moore's law is a terrible method for prediction in the multicore era. Fab process, die space, and tdp is much better.
That's what I mean by "adjusted".
-Pyromaniac-
Member
the less they live up to it the better, because maybe it will mean getting a second console won't be necessary, lulz. I'm selfish like that. Also GAF meltdowns are a sight to behold, the gifs are glorious.You're good. But that mentality is definitely out there and there will be glorious meltdowns if Sony and MS don't live up to "those" expectations. I see myself being similar to EatChildren in focusing on Wii U and PC so what the others do don't really matter that much to me from a tech standpoint. So I'd like to see things happen that way just for the meltdowns.
Inferno313
Banned
I really wish we could get a black Wii U at launch. I know it's not going to happen but I just got a Black Wii Remote today and this thing is so much sexier than the White Wii stuff.
That is not true. The "dudebro" market (which I feel would be better if we just call them the 18-35 year old male demographic) doesn't have a strong brand loyalty. The difference between them and people posting here is that they don't want to experiment and expand their taste. They want something specific, and they will support whoever provides that. Make no mistake, Nintendo's software will probably never appeal to them, but a strong 3rd party support may just be enough to put the WiiU in a competitive position in their eyes.
Don't forget, Red Steel and Resident Evil 4 both did great on the Wii, that does say something.
Even if Nintendo provided hardware that was comparable to ps4 (unlikely due to timing and developer comments), they'd still be at a disadvantage due to the service platforms that have developed with Xbox live and PSN.
Nintendo have to have a massive jump in power *and* a massive leap forward in inline/service offerings to just draw level.
I just don't see them doing that. Next gen they'll just be a console for playing Nintendo games for me, just like the Wii was. I'm not sure they'll ever be able to be a realistic one console choice for anyone that has money and time invested in either Xbox live or PSN, and there are millions of those
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
There was only a four-year gap between Xbox and Xbox 360. Why is it so hard to believe that we'll see a jump that big with a seven-year gap?
AceBandage
Banned
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
... because they're targeted at 5-6yo consoles. (or in the case of MMOs, casuals who have old PCs) GPUs have gotten far more powerful, and there's still another year for the gap to widen.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
Ambassador's get tags now? When did that happen? Where's mine?
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
I've had two tags and lost both.
The first was when they gave practically everyone tags and then everyone had to register again and lost them.
The second... I have no idea why it got removed.
All I've heard is that they removed Gamecube support.
Aizu_Itsuko
Member
Absolutely.
The Wii was just a relatively small upgrade compared to the GC, which is unprecedented for Nintendo.
The Wii U seems to be both a massive upgrade from the Wii (not that hard) and a relatively small jump from other current gen systems (PS3/360). At the very least it's like a modern, 2012 version of the Wii performance-wise (probably better) with the extra of having a more up to date architecture.
Also, I agree with whoever said you can't use the Wii as proof that Nintendo underpowers all their systems or the PS3 to say Sony overpowers them.
On the home console front, Nintendo has released plenty of systems that were comparable or better than what was available on the market. They could receive some criticism for always cheapen out in some aspect of their systems though (NES/SNES: CPU, N64: cartridges, GC: mini-discs, plus others).
Sony released the PSX and the PS2, two consoles that were both affordable and cutting edge. In the case of the PS3, it seems like there was a lot of pressure to put Cell and a Blu-Ray drive in there, crazy Ken went all out with the bells and whistles (that's what happens when a passionate engineer makes the decisions); add a couple of unexpected problems and the manufacturing costs skyrocketed. The perfect storm.
Things are different now.
Nintendo still makes profits their first priority but they want to recover some of the core market they lost this gen and is taking steps in that direction and Sony, while still being cutting edge, aren't in crazy mode. This will give us two more balanced systems.
Aizu_Itsuko
Member
That's simply not true.
People expect MS and Sony to offer a higher-end machine than Nintendo, but that's all.
Don't use hyperbole and generalize.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
Plays Wii games, but won't increase their resolution. Like pretty much every instance of backward compatibility we've seen over the last 15 years.
The expectance to up res previous console titles is kinda greedy. We've taken things like Dolphin for granted, and it's not like not increasing the resolution of Wii games on the WiiU will be an exception.
brain_stew
Member
Upscaling isn't much of a feature. Your HDTV does that already.
I do think the Wii U will be meatier than people expect, and essentially be the Dreamcast (or PS2) of this generation compared to the other 2 systems.
I just hope graphically we can go beyond Samaritan on all systems, because it's honestly not a generational leap over what we have now.
I just hope graphically we can go beyond Samaritan on all systems, because it's honestly not a generational leap over what we have now.
... You mean despite the fact that developers call the 580 10x more powerful?
And neither of those GPUs can be used in a console anyway.
Yeah, basically, I'm hoping for Wii U to cost around $100 less than the primary SKU of the nearest competitor, and for it to be like buying Wii U is like buying a mid-range PC (it can play the games you want with some compromises, but it's cheaper) versus to other ones being like buying a high-end PC (plays the games the way they're meant to be played, but at a premium). I can see Microsoft and Sony wanting to slowly phase in the next generation while keeping their current consoles on the market for an extra 2-3 years, allowing them to go for more expensive consoles until they're able to lower prices.
fabricated backlash
Member
I have a feeling that people are extremely underestimating the Wii Us pricepoint. I guess we have to look at 350 to 400 as a realistic pricepoint. Given that the console will probably come with a Tablet and a Wiimote+and Nunchuck, everything below 350 is delusional.
And even then do I think that Nintendo might sell it at a slight loss.
And even then do I think that Nintendo might sell it at a slight loss.
The Wii Remote and Nunchuck cost about $10-12 to make combined.
Chittagong
Gold Member
Here's my estimate of Wii U BOM
Tablet inc. screen, battery, wireless, mechanics - $100
Wiimote + Nunchuck - $10
CPU - $80
GPU - $80
RAM - $40
Flash - $10
PSU + Cables - $15
Wireless - $5
Case + Fan - $15
Motherboard - $15
Optical - $20
TOTAL - $370
And that's with a pretty optimistic optical CPU and GPU price. I agree $249 is completely out of the question. $349 retail would still make a significant loss but I think they will push for it.
Basically, they really fucked themselves by including the tablet. They must really believe they can create some truly unique games with it.
No way the controller will cost $100 to make. That's just impossible. There are actual tablets that retail for that much. $50-60 is more likely.
fabricated backlash
Member
I really doubt that the tab costs anywhere near 100 Bucks to produce. Around 50 is more likely with a retailer pricepoint of 80 to 100.
If you really believe that it costs them 100 to make, then yes.
Developing for hardware in a console will give different results from developing for the same hardware in a PC. And as you pointed out, neither of those are used in consoles. There might lie your answer, though i'm not making claims about what GPU is how many times more powerful than an other.
Cerebral Assassin
Member
They tried during with the GC (moneyhats for RE, "mature" titles published by Nintendo), it failed badly.
Because Nintendo has no problem making "popular" games, just not ones that appeal to the COD market(which is a problem that most of the industry shares).
Chittagong
Gold Member
For comparison, iPad screen only BOM is $127 according to iSupply. Halve that and add case, battery, wireless receiver and sender and control buttons and circuitry and you are at $75-100. It's a massive, massive bet. Not only physically.
Well, I would argue that it was too late in the Gamecube's console cycle for the Resident Evil deal to have maximum impact, but didn't Resident Evil 4 go on the sell more and have its definitive version on the Gamecube? I wouldn't exactly call that a total failure.
Don't get me wrong, I've owned every Nintendo system and the Gamecube is by far my favorite machine (truly a beautiful piece of gaming tech). But that said, it definitely had it's "WTF?" faults. Mini discs (which kept it from getting large ports), strange controller, lack of inputs, no attempt at online, interviews with Nintendo heads actually implying that there were certain games they didn't want on their system. It also didn't help that right when MS entered the race and was at the forefront of labeling Nintendo consoles as "for children," Nintendo responded by releasing a purple lunchbox that made baby noises when you booted it.
My argument is that Nintendo has a habit of offsetting inspiring and truly innovating hardware design with some crazy "wtf? why would they do that?" hardware decisions that always leaves them looking less than the competition in significant areas. It hasn't been since the SNES that Nintendo released a console that was all-around competent in comparison to the competition.
Except for, you know, all those other games that have been sprinting to million sellers within the first few days/weeks of launch.
Oh right, forgot about that.
Hope they get close to what the Wii games in Dolphin look like.
I can see myself buying the Wii U just for this if they get it right, and the Wii games looks close to Dolphin quality and also runs flawlessly.
This could also be a great thing in their marketing to push on.
Dreamwriter
Member
Nintendo as a rule doesn't sell for a loss. They did with the 3DS as an emergency measure after messing up its launch, that's the only time they've done so. Anyways, based on Reggie's statement the device is going to be hell-expensive. I mean, if someone with $60,000 in disposable income can't afford the system, that's just nuts. Someone has $5,000 left each month after paying all bills and for all necessities for their family, and they can't afford the Wii-U?!
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
No. That isnt what he's saying.
fabricated backlash
Member
I think Reggie just worded this line very very poorly. Especially considering the current financial climate, his reply was rather comical.
Nintendo has really only two options: Blow people away with a lineup, featureset and tech behemoth and sell at a decent amount of money, waiting for the mainstream to join in by price reductions and bundles, or to sell at a loss.
I really don't expect the Wii U to be any sort of tech behemoth. But I really don't care either. But a lot of the mainstream does care if the games run on their system. People even tell you that the PS2 version of RE4 looked better, some people will even argue that dual analog beats mouse aiming... The only people really being pissed about the Wii U going to be the weakest console next gen are tech nerds, and fanboys to be honest. And to the former I'd say they are idiots for even expecting a console to be on the cutting edge of technology.
So Nintendo is really only left with one alternative: Sell the console at a loss or close to a break even, have modest hardware compared to the next offerings of MS and Sony and to get as much 3rd party support as possible early on.
I'm not even sure they need the teen audience that buys warshooters religiously. Series like Mario Kart, Uncharted, Just Dance etc have shown that the market as a whole is a lot bigger than COD/BF whatever. The key to get an advantage over your competitor is to have a machine that can play all or close to all popular games. And if Nintendo plays it's cards right, they should have no problem on nailing that down.
there's another nintendo direct stream scheduled for Dec 26th 7:00pm Japan time
edit: ah, old news I see, there's already a thread
edit: ah, old news I see, there's already a thread
About the Wii and 3DS officially, not Wii U.
Someone said that Reggie said we would hear something about the Wii U before the end of the year, but I can't find that quote.
It was bgassassin. Hitmen are already in position, ready to strike at 12:00am on Jan 1 if he's wrong.
m.i.s.
Banned
Agree with all of this. Only to add that the original Wii will drop off rapidly. No way has Nintendo built the customer and 3rd party base to have both Wii and Wii U to coexist for any length of time. Sony could continue selling PS1 long after PS2 entered the market but I'm thinking the original Wii will be discounted to $99 and eol'd rapidly - despite what Reggie says.
Yes, but I can't find Reggie's quote where he says that.
Huh? I though we were talking about mobile technology here. Who is saying that the 3DS is comparable to the HD twins? Even the Vita has to do mayor compromises in order to run 360/Ps3 games, like MvC that runs a sub qHD. Or compare the media we have of Resistance Vita to Resistance 1 on the Ps3 and RR vs RR.
But the point is, that the 3DS compared fine with high end 2010 hardware, when it was supposed to be released initially.
Sure, It gets outclassed by 2011 high-end handheld solutions, but the tech in the sector is moving incredibly fast. What was Apple jump? 9x from A4 to A5? There are even some people stating that Vita hardware is inadequate and that they should have waited a few months for a Rogue series GPU and an A15 CPU on 28nm.
Since this is a Wii U thread though, this doesn't happen on the desktop class GPU world. We don't get yearly 9x jumps. And all companies seem to be going for the same GPU vendor, unlike the mobile world were PowerVR seems to have conformaby the upper hand against its rivals in performance.
It wasn't reggie who said it, it was one of bgassassin's inside secret ninja moles, probably the one that's disguised as a water cooler at Nintendo's main HQ
bgassassin
Member
I DIDN'T DO IT!
*actually reads posts*
Oh yeah I was told Nintendo would say something about the Wii U before the end of the year. But that was also said before Nintendo announced the "re-unveil".
First I guarantee there will be some disappointed people when the next consoles don't have 6-8GB of memory. And second there are a decent amount of people out there constantly saying Wii U is using old technology and have very poor expectations of what it will be able to do. The gap will be smaller than what they expect and if my launch date expectations end up being true, we'll get to see those expectations punched in the stomach pretty quick.
I used almost same analogy on a different board a day or so ago. That's how I see next gen shaping up (Wii U = mid-range PC, PS4/Xbox3 = high-end PC).
I'd shave about $50 off the tab, $5 off the Wiimote/nunchuck, and spread that around to the other components. Mainly the CPU/GPU/memory. But that amount is also the max BOM I see happening. One thing I don't expect Nintendo to do is take a larger than $50 loss on the hardware. I think they'd keep it at a point where selling one full first-party game would cause a breakeven on profit, then any additional games sold (first or third-party) and accessories would cover all other hardware related costs (R&D, shipping, marketing, etc.) till they eventually become profitable either due to big sales or eventually reduction in manufacturing costs. I expect them to take a loss, but they won't completely change their stripes to the point of having a loss leader for a long period of time.
Also as a comparison I think the iSupply estimates also had the 3DS at a little over $100 total. I don't think the controller would be that close to the 3DS.
*actually reads posts*
Oh yeah I was told Nintendo would say something about the Wii U before the end of the year. But that was also said before Nintendo announced the "re-unveil".
First I guarantee there will be some disappointed people when the next consoles don't have 6-8GB of memory. And second there are a decent amount of people out there constantly saying Wii U is using old technology and have very poor expectations of what it will be able to do. The gap will be smaller than what they expect and if my launch date expectations end up being true, we'll get to see those expectations punched in the stomach pretty quick.
I used almost same analogy on a different board a day or so ago. That's how I see next gen shaping up (Wii U = mid-range PC, PS4/Xbox3 = high-end PC).
I'd shave about $50 off the tab, $5 off the Wiimote/nunchuck, and spread that around to the other components. Mainly the CPU/GPU/memory. But that amount is also the max BOM I see happening. One thing I don't expect Nintendo to do is take a larger than $50 loss on the hardware. I think they'd keep it at a point where selling one full first-party game would cause a breakeven on profit, then any additional games sold (first or third-party) and accessories would cover all other hardware related costs (R&D, shipping, marketing, etc.) till they eventually become profitable either due to big sales or eventually reduction in manufacturing costs. I expect them to take a loss, but they won't completely change their stripes to the point of having a loss leader for a long period of time.
Also as a comparison I think the iSupply estimates also had the 3DS at a little over $100 total. I don't think the controller would be that close to the 3DS.
The iPad's screen is nearly three times as big, capacitive, uses high-end IPS technology, uses a near-defunct screen aspect ratio, and has almost double the resolution. You can't really use that at all.
fabricated backlash
Member
Especially since the Wii U is simply the better deal, even to an uneducated consumer. Sure it's more expensive, but with BC out of the box, support for all Wii peripherals (huge advantage) I'd guess that Nintendo is betting on migrating a large part of Wii owners to the WiiU on that investment alone.
And I'd be happy to. Another Wii Fit, Wii Sports Resort in HD, and I'm ready to go without having to buy peripherals? Or the vast availability of used peripherals to reasonable prices...
I think when Reggie sayst that they are continuing to support the Wii, then that simply means they are prepared to repackage it, slash the price and continue selling it as long as there is even a tiny market share to be had. I'd say the Wii could easily sell at 99 Bucks with Mario Kart included for a good year. Hell at that price I wouldn't be surprised, if it would outsell the WiiU during the next holiday rush.
fabricated backlash
Member
And that would be exactly what I want.
Smiles and Cries
Member
I don't mind the Wii U having a premium price... its not that I can afford it and would not want a cheaper console but I already own a Wii and a 3DS. I want Nintendo to have something that is slick and solid tech wise. Something that still can push respectable graphics in 2015.
so if the price is a bit higher than expected than just maybe what is inside of the little box can deliver on what I would like to see happen with the WiiU. Not just another Wii but a respectable beast that not being left out of multiplatform games.
so if the price is a bit higher than expected than just maybe what is inside of the little box can deliver on what I would like to see happen with the WiiU. Not just another Wii but a respectable beast that not being left out of multiplatform games.
Dreamwriter
Member
I don't get this statement. No way has Nintendo built the customer base to keep Wii around? A year ago there were 85 million Wii owners, more than there were PS2 owners after 5 years into its life (and PS2 sold amazingly well long into this generation). And more third-party games have sold on Wii than XBox 360 or PS3, so it has third-party developers covered as well.
I think a big advantage to the Wii is that a large part of its market aren't normal gamers, and are people who wouldn't think of buying a new console - the kind of person who would say "Why would I buy something new, I already have a game system!"
m.i.s.
Banned
Let me put it this way: Nintendo just had to quietly phase out the DSi/XL by reducing the price of the 3DS without lowering the price of the former. Sales of the DSi/XL were acting as an impediment to widespread adoption of the new 3DS handheld. Similarly, unless Nintendo phases out the Wii, it could act as an impediment to widespread apdoption of the Wii U.
- Status