Wii U Speculation Thread of Brains Beware: Wii U Re-Unveiling At E3 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
AzureJericho said:
I don't understand this mentality when it comes to console pricing. You realize that 300 bucks of today tech greatly exceeds 300 dollars worth of tech when 360/PS3 first launched, right? People need to realize that it's been almost 7 years since these consoles came out and adjust their expectations more accordingly.

Personally, I'm feeling $349 USD is the magic number, but I do , but I would also be confident with saying $299 as it has that softer ring to itself.
Click to expand...

And if it weren't for the tablet controller I'd absolutely agree with you. Nintendo proved with the Gamecube that they know how to squeeze in quality hardware with a competitive price.

The controller ruins everything, though, because I just don't see how the thing's going to be cheap based on what Nintendo wants to accomplish with it. People still can't agree on an efficient way for the controller to handle low-latency streaming of intensive game data, and I don't even want to think about the price of the battery they're going to have to put in that sucker (because anything close to the 3DS' piss-poor battery life would be unacceptable for a console controller).

And I'd much rather that Nintendo went up on the price than pull another Wii and give us laughing stock hardware just to serve as a vehicle for their controller. I don't think Nintendo can afford to do that again this time around. Nintendo doesn't have to go balls to the wall on hardware, but they need hardware that will be able to produce comparable graphics to the competition for at least the 1st half of the gen.

Based on Reggie's abysmally worded comments recently, I think Nintendo realizes this. I see $350 as the absolute minimum the Wii U will be priced, with $399 within the realm of possibility and $379 my personal guess.
 
maeda said:
Yeah, 350 would essentially get us a future-proof system with a somewhat mass market price. Especially since we know that both Box and PS will not be less than 399.
Click to expand...

This.

I think $350 allows you to put in decent enough tech to satisfy the core, whilst not being too far outta reach of the mainstream. What Nintendo needs to do is hammer home wii u's features so that the public feels they are getting their penny's worth. Its all comparative anyway. I mean many of us thought the wii was overpriced, but the other consoles were even more expensive (not that they weren't worth the asking price). With the perceived value consumers placed on wii's motion controls, it was considered good value for money.

Now next gen i think will be a much greater hurdle. Mostly because I don't think either Microsoft or Sony will price themselves out of the market. Wii u will obviously be weaker than it could be due to the controller eating up costs and Nintendo is aiming for the same market. I think they will be fine so long as they can get ports of xbox 3 and ps4 games.
 
BowieZ said:
my predixorz

$279 Wii U standard set (console + 1x uPad only)
$299 Super Wii U set... also includes 2x Wii Remote Pluses + accessories pack (screen protector, cloth, uPad charge dock and case, etc)

additional uPads are $59
Click to expand...

Then you split the market like the 360's HDD. Developers won't fully support the Wiimote if it's not in every box, guaranteed. So they may as well not put any Wiimotes in any SKU at that point.

And $299 for the New Controller and two Remote+ controllers? Not gonna happen. Unless Nintendo wants a $50+ loss per console sold.
 
royalan said:
And if it weren't for the tablet controller I'd absolutely agree with you. Nintendo proved with the Gamecube that they know how to squeeze in quality hardware with a competitive price.

The controller ruins everything, though, because I just don't see how the thing's going to be cheap based on what Nintendo wants to accomplish with it. People still can't agree on an efficient way for the controller to handle low-latency streaming of intensive game data, and I don't even want to think about the price of the battery they're going to have to put in that sucker (because anything close to the 3DS' piss-poor battery life would be unacceptable for a console controller).

And I'd much rather that Nintendo went up on the price than pull another Wii and give us laughing stock hardware just to serve as a vehicle for their controller. I don't think Nintendo can afford to do that again this time around. Nintendo doesn't have to go balls to the wall on hardware, but they need hardware that will be able to produce comparable graphics to the competition for at least the 1st half of the gen.

Based on Reggie's abysmally worded comments recently, I think Nintendo realizes this. I see $350 as the absolute minimum the Wii U will be priced, with $399 within the realm of possibility and $379 my personal guess.
Click to expand...

The controller isn't a handheld gaming device like 3DS, so it won't require a huge battery. It'll need something more than 3DS because it'll be expected to last significantly longer of course, but 3000-4000mAh should do it. As for the cost, $40-$50 is a reasonable guess IMO, that leaves $250-260 for the console assuming they'll make a small loss to begin with. I suppose wether that can build you anything more than a souped up XBox 360 really depends on what you mean by souped up.
 
Upads may cost $80 if they sell them separately (maybe more), but some of you guys aren't being bright if you think they'll cost much to produce.

I don't think Nintendo has ever made a peripheral that costs them much to make.
 
Donnie said:
The controller isn't a handheld gaming device like 3DS though, so it won't require a huge battery. As for the cost, $40-$50 is a reasonable guess IMO, that leaves $250-260 for the console assuming they'll make a small loss to begin with. I suppose wether that can build you anything more than a souped up XBox 360 really depends on what you mean by souped up.
Click to expand...

Well, my big problem with the 3DS is that it doesn't have a huge battery. It gets, what - around 3 hours per charge? Anything near that would be absolutely unacceptable for a console controller.

And the Wii U Tablet is going to need a battery big enough to power:

--A 6+ inch screen
--Touch input on said screen
--Button input
--Rumble
--Motion technology
--Cameras
--Whatever hippy streaming technology they're planning to use that will be able to handle 2-way streaming of game visual and input data consistently with negligible latency (i.e. so slight you never notice it).

I think they're going to need a decent size battery to handle all of that and maintains a decent life. I don't think a batter the size of the one in the 3DS would come close to cutting it.
 
Thunder Monkey said:
Upads may cost $80 if they sell them separately (maybe more), but some of you guys aren't being bright if you think they'll cost much to produce.

I don't think Nintendo has ever made a peripheral that costs them much to make.
Click to expand...

Yeah, though I'd bet its not going to be much under $40.
 
royalan said:
Well, my big problem with the 3DS is that it doesn't have a huge battery. It gets, what - around 3 hours per charge? Anything near that would be absolutely unacceptable for console controller.

And the Wii U Tablet is going to need a battery big enough to power:

--A 6+ inch screen
--Touch input on said screen
--Button input
--Rumble
--Motion technology
--Cameras
--Whatever hippy streaming technology they're planning to use that will be able to handle 2-way streaming of game visual and input data consistently with negligible latency (i.e. so slight you never notice it).

I think they're going to need a decent size battery to handle all of that and maintains a decent life. I don't think a batter the size of the one in the 3DS would come close to cutting it.
Click to expand...

Somewhere between 3000-4000mAh (3600mAh maybe) will probably be fine and that's not really huge, or expensive, $5 or so in bulk?
 
Donnie said:
Somewhere between 3000-4000mAh will probably be fine and that's not really huge, or expensive, $5 or so in bulk?
Click to expand...

I don't know. I'd like that question answered though, too. I always thought that large batteries of the type you find in tablets and the Vita were expensive and contributed a lot to the total cost of the devices.
 
Maybe when it comes to the kind of battery in a device like Ipad 2 (7000mAh) it is quite expensive. But I can't see a decent 3200mAh or 3600mAh battery bought in bulk direct from the manufacturer being very expensive.
 
royalan said:
I don't know. I'd like that question answered though, too. I always thought that large batteries of the type you find in tablets and the Vita were expensive and contributed a lot to the total cost of the devices.
Click to expand...

For reference, iPad battery is enormous at 6920 mAh. It comes with a BOM of $17.50, which I think is a bit low but understandable given their purchasing volumes and hard negotiators.

I would expect Wii U tablet battery to be at 4000 mAh with a BOM of $10-12.
 
bgassassin said:
It can't be that phrase. This is the idea I've been wanting to see return for I don't know how long and the phrase must be "Wii would like U to play." I refuse to accept any substitutes. :P
Click to expand...

Since Wii was about making it easier for non-gamers to get into games

what if the Wii U is about wanting them to take the next step forward

"CAN U PLAY NOW?"

:P
 
Grampa Simpson said:
I'm coming from an IP telephony background. When it was mentioned that the system could only support one tablet, I started assuming that they dropped a standalone codec in the system and tablet. Probably leaving the IP and UDP and maybe even the H.323 in place. I have no idea of the latency incurred framing a 802.11n frame, but I do know that most of the nicer hardware codecs are going to be able to encode or decode a frame (whether I or P) in less than a 60th of a second. My assumption was a 2-3 frame latency from the output buffer to the tablet screen which while noticeable is something that see anyway in many older LCD TVs and is something that we should be able to compensate for.
Click to expand...
My familiarity with both is cursory, but from what I can devise (curse you, ieee subscription fees), WirelessHD (AKA ieee 802.15.3c) and WHDI both target sub-ms latency performances. WHDI is an already available tech, with existing products using it, but also capping at lower BWs that 'just' satisfy current HD video needs. WirelessHD is based on the next-gen wireless standards (802.15) and has much greater potential (up to 28Gb/s currently) but also is much more sensitive to environment conditions due to being in the mm wavelengths (60GHz), requiring line of sight, etc. Anyhow, tens of ms of latencies is out of the question for this sort of application, IMO.
 
bgassassin said:
It can't be that phrase. This is the idea I've been wanting to see return for I don't know how long and the phrase must be "Wii would like U to play." I refuse to accept any substitutes. :P
Click to expand...

Smiles and Cries said:
Since Wii was about making it easier for non-gamers to get into games

what if the Wii U is about wanting them to take the next step forward

"CAN U PLAY NOW?"

:P
Click to expand...

I like the one that goes:

"Super Wii is here."


Or the one that mentions that brand new name that has nothing do with Wii whatsoever. Yeah, that one's the best.
 
"Now U're Playing with Power...AGAIN"

3AQmK.gif
 
The Upad will definitely not use a 802.11 based connection, and probably won't even use any of the wireless standards. All they need is a simple sender in the console that compresses 854x480 images and sends that to the Upad through some radio signal, while the Upad has some dedicated chip decompressing the images and displaying them. That's really all they need: loss of information is barely a problem for streamed images (they will always look alright) so they don't need any sort of connection management. They also won't use a video codec, as those need a respectable buffer to achieve proper compression, and will cause a lot of latency. Looking at WirelessHD will be quite easily possible to achieve the desired bandwidth using some RF band at SD resolutions, and it will put most of the power requirements in the console. For communication other than images Nintendo will probably just use the same Bluetooth as in the Wiimotes.
 
upad has 3 issues for me.

low res

single touch

no confirmation on local multiplayer on 4 upads

beyond that I am willing to pay kinect price point for one. I hope Nintendo does at least say a bit more about these things on Tuesday
 
I don't think the controller itself is doing much, right? It's just interpreting and sending back signals.

Powering the screen is going to be the bigger battery draw, but it shouldn't get in to 3DS territory unless there's been major changes since E3.
 
I don't understand what the appeal is... And I can honestly say I never felt that way about any of the big innovations Nintendo has proposed, I just wish I knew what the it's all about. For the first time it really does feel like a mistake.
 
Azelover said:
I don't understand what the appeal is... And I can honestly say I never felt that way about any of the big innovations Nintendo has proposed, I just wish I knew what the it's all about. For the first time it really does feel like a mistake.
Click to expand...

asymmetrical gameplay
hudless gameplay
virtual windows
console gaming without a TV
additional inputs + motion
 
DS games sold through the wii u store playable on the tv!

I always wanted a controller with a touchscreen on it, since the dreamcast days with its glorious VMU
 
guek said:
asymmetrical gameplay
hudless gameplay
virtual windows
console gaming without a TV
additional inputs + motion
Click to expand...

That is what may prove to be what gives the system the real wow factor I notice that Nintendo have been very low key about this aspect since E3. The behind closed doors demo was a showcase for this I believe. The facility to extend the game visuals beyond the confines of the tv screen could prove to be a real game changer and is what has me most moist for the system.
 
Azelover said:
I don't understand what the appeal is... And I can honestly say I never felt that way about any of the big innovations Nintendo has proposed, I just wish I knew what the it's all about. For the first time it really does feel like a mistake.
Click to expand...

I agree. With the wiimote the appeal it would have on gamers and casual audiences was obvious. Not so much with the tablet. Dual screen technology is nothing new, casual audiences have seen it before, and it hasn't proven to be anything super revolutionary. At least not in the way the wiimote was with motion controls. It works with some ideas, and is a total distraction with others. Heck, the fact that Sony - who is known to blatantly ripoff Nintendo's good ideas - is sticking with one large high-res touch screen instead of going with the dual screen method is proof that the DS line's dual screen isn't a game changer. I don't think the Wii U's dual screen concept will be much of one, either.

That's why I'm hoping that Nintendo is treating the controller as secondary to making a truly compelling console. Hardware first, controller second.

guek said:
asymmetrical gameplay
hudless gameplay
virtual windows
console gaming without a TV
additional inputs + motion
Click to expand...

The bolded is the only truly compelling use of the tablet controller that I l can imagine being universally utilized by 3rd parties. Virtual windows is such a gimmicky idea that I'm surprised people are jumping on it like they are.

And console gaming without a TV will only be possible with games that don't make use of the screen in regular play.
 
Azelover said:
I don't understand what the appeal is... And I can honestly say I never felt that way about any of the big innovations Nintendo has proposed, I just wish I knew what the it's all about. For the first time it really does feel like a mistake.
Click to expand...

It'll be interesting to see how the tablet is used in western games. Nintendo clearly has a focus on social, single room multiplayer (everyone around the tv) and I can see where having an extra 'screen' would provide for interesting gameplay options.

But for a more online oriented experience, you don't need that physical separation of screen
 
royalan said:
I agree. With the wiimote the appeal it would have on gamers and casual audiences was obvious. Not so much with the tablet. Dual screen technology is nothing new, casual audiences have seen it before, and it hasn't proven to be anything super revolutionary. At least not in the way the wiimote was with motion controls. It works with some ideas, and is a total distraction with others. Heck, the fact that Sony - who is known to blatantly ripoff Nintendo's good ideas - is sticking with one large high-res touch screen instead of going with the dual screen method is proof that the DS line's dual screen isn't a game changer. I don't think the Wii U's dual screen concept will be much of one, either.

That's why I'm hoping that Nintendo is treating the controller as secondary to making a truly compelling console. Hardware first, controller second.



The bolded is the only truly compelling use of the tablet controller that I l can imagine being universally utilized by 3rd parties. Virtual windows is such a gimmicky idea that I'm surprised people are jumping on it like they are.

And console gaming without a TV will only be possible with games that don't make use of the screen in regular play.
Click to expand...

If you're not a developer working with a Wii U kit, its hard to imagine any of the possibilities of the device. Usually people don't get any of the appeal of a technology at all, untill they are presented with a real working piece of software that uses it cleverly. Nintendo has shown again and again that they best understand their hardware and they probably did a hell of a lot of experimenting. It's not like you are experimenting with the device, or thinking about the possibilities 24/7. Developers do that, and that's why we should wait and see with what they come up with.
 
ksamedi said:
If you're not a developer working with a Wii U kit, its hard to imagine any of the possibilities of the device. Usually people don't get any of the appeal of a technology at all, untill they are presented with a real working piece of software that uses it cleverly. Nintendo has shown again and again that they best understand their hardware and they probably did a hell of a lot of experimenting. It's not like you are experimenting with the device, or thinking about the possibilities 24/7. Developers do that, and that's why we should wait and see with what they come up with.
Click to expand...

Well said. Ideas and concepts are fine but it is execution that counts.
 
ksamedi said:
If you're not a developer working with a Wii U kit, its hard to imagine any of the possibilities of the device. Usually people don't get any of the appeal of a technology at all, untill they are presented with a real working piece of software that uses it cleverly. Nintendo has shown again and again that they best understand their hardware and they probably did a hell of a lot of experimenting. It's not like you are experimenting with the device, or thinking about the possibilities 24/7. Developers do that, and that's why we should wait and see with what they come up with.
Click to expand...


Again, not the case with the wiimote.

I don't know a single gamer whose mind didn't run wild with the possibilities for motion controls when the wiimote was first unveiled. Sure, we would later learn that the wiimote wasn't precise enough to make a lot of them happen, but that would later be fixed with motion +. Even today, 6 years later, all of the best applications of the wiimote are with concepts that gamers fantasized about from day 1.

With the tablet, if it's not immediately obvious how it's going to revolutionize gaming, chances are it's not. At least not on the level that motion controls did.

This isn't to say that I think the tablet is an altogether bad idea. I just don't think it'll have the same impact as other innovations, so Nintendo would be better off making the controller a part of a complete package, and not gimping every other aspect of the Wii U just to showcase something the public at large has seen before.

Not to mention, hopefully Nintendo has learned by now what happens when they make developing for their hardware a puzzle for 3rd parties. 3rd parties just don't. There's too much money to be made elsewhere to be jumping through Nintendo-made hoops.
 
Error Macro said:
I like the one that goes:

"Super Wii is here."


Or the one that mentions that brand new name that has nothing do with Wii whatsoever. Yeah, that one's the best.
Click to expand...

Smiles and Cries said:
"Now U're Playing with Power...AGAIN"

3AQmK.gif
Click to expand...

Both of you suck. :P

royalan said:
Virtual windows is such a gimmicky idea that I'm surprised people are jumping on it like they are.
Click to expand...

Waahh?!!

Fatal Frame and American commercials made like these would make an instant seller IMO and negate the "gimmickiness" of the virtual window.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMjQwE7yfHk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzIw5mcLkvo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlTImeNEzZQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqzyalZRhmk
 
i dunno, i think the possibilities with the tablet are pretty obvious and instantly appealing. virtual windows and hudless gaming is all well and good, but i'm most excited for asymmetrical gaming. Even killer freaks, which looks at the moment to be a sub par game all around, is going to use asymmetrical aspects from the get go. It's in no way a "gimmick" or something old school controller or keyboard based gamers wont be able to get into. It's translates into new experiences not before seen on consoles.
 
bgassassin said:
Waahh?!!

Fatal Frame and American commercials made like these would make an instant seller IMO and negate the "gimmickiness" of the virtual window.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMjQwE7yfHk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzIw5mcLkvo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlTImeNEzZQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqzyalZRhmk
Click to expand...

1) Didn't really understand the point you were making through those commercials. :(

2) To me, virtual windows is such a specific idea that would only really work with specific types of games that I don't think it would be worth gimping an entire console for. Motion controls have applications that can work across a wide variety of game types and interaction concepts (pointer controls for menu selection and FPS, motion controls for swordplay and 3 dimensional interraction). The whole "lift the controller to the screen to see things that aren't there!!!" concept would get old fast and really only be viable with certain types of games in very specific ways.
 
royalan said:
1) Didn't really understand the point you were making through those commercials. :(

2) To me, virtual windows is such a specific idea that would only really work with specific types of games that I don't think it would be worth gimping an entire console for. Motion controls have applications that can work across a wide variety of game types and interaction concepts (pointer controls for menu selection and FPS, motion controls for swordplay and 3 dimensional interraction). The whole "lift the controller to the screen to see things that aren't there!!!" concept would get old fast and really only be viable with certain types of games in very specific ways.
Click to expand...
How would the addition of new features, such as a virtual window, gimp an entire console? And how do the fact that some games could use the controller as a virtual window negate the games that use it as a touchscreen, or a secondary screen, which is something the Nintendo DS has shown can add a lot to almost all games and genres?

As for virtual window games themselves, AR games on the 3DS are extremely fun, and could not be done without a "virtual window" device. Thus the lack of it would exclude an entire genre of games.
 
Dreamwriter said:
How would the addition of new features, such as a virtual window, gimp an entire console? And how do the fact that some games could use the controller as a virtual window negate the games that use it as a touchscreen, or a secondary screen, which is something the Nintendo DS has shown can add a lot to almost all games and genres?
Click to expand...

Because good consoles are one part imagination/innovation, and one part practicality.

The idea alone doesn't gimp a console, and if Nintendo can still give us a future-proof console with decent hardware along with a tablet-style controller that supports these ideas, then more power to them. However, if they have to cut back on the hardware in the console to provide this tablet controller at a decent price just to make specific ideas work then I wouldn't find it worth it.

I mean, I'm sure a treadmill attachment would make make running a more immersive experience, but it wouldn't be at all practical to include one with a console. Same goes for that crazy Steel Battalion controller. Extreme examples I know, but they suit my point.
 
royalan said:
1) Didn't really understand the point you were making through those commercials. :(

2) To me, virtual windows is such a specific idea that would only really work with specific types of games that I don't think it would be worth gimping an entire console for. Motion controls have applications that can work across a wide variety of game types and interaction concepts (pointer controls for menu selection and FPS, motion controls for swordplay and 3 dimensional interraction). The whole "lift the controller to the screen to see things that aren't there!!!" concept would get old fast and really only be viable with certain types of games in very specific ways.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's that specific. You can use it to find things or give an alternate view of the game from the top of my head. And from there it depends on the game and how it's used for said game.

The commercials were just to show that it could be a popular control method that people would embrace if you give them the right reason.
 
royalan said:
Because good consoles are one part imagination/innovation, and one part practicality.

The idea alone doesn't gimp a console, and if Nintendo can still give us a future-proof console with decent hardware along with a tablet-style controller that supports these ideas, then more power to them. However, if they have to cut back on the hardware in the console to provide this tablet controller at a decent price just to make specific ideas work then I wouldn't find it worth it.

I mean, I'm sure a treadmill attachment would make make running a more immersive experience, but it wouldn't be at all practical to include one with a console. Same goes for that crazy Steel Battalion controller. Extreme examples I know, but they suit my point.
Click to expand...

If the 3ds gives us any indication, innovation and extra features give Nintendo reasons to increase the power of the console if needed. The 3ds graphical power was doubled when nintendo decided to focus on 3d to maintain the original target performance. Nintendo appears to already have a target performance for the Wii U, so Nintendo will probably just boost the system's power if needed.
 
royalan said:
I mean, I'm sure a treadmill attachment would make make running a more immersive experience, but it wouldn't be at all practical to include one with a console. Same goes for that crazy Steel Battalion controller. Extreme examples I know, but they suit my point.
Click to expand...

They don't really suit your point at all. There are plenty of interesting potential gameplay possibilities with the new controller. The controller itself is incredibly practical, that's what's so appealing about it. I see what you mean about the controller being another additional cost that might constrain the hardware, and there's a point to be had there, but specs aren't everything. In any case, I don't think we're going to have another wii situation where nintendo purposefully uses nothing but last gen hardware.
 
Damon Bennet said:
DS games sold through the wii u store playable on the tv!

I always wanted a controller with a touchscreen on it, since the dreamcast days with its glorious VMU
Click to expand...

I am wondering if they'll do this. The thing stopping them from doing a "DS Player" was the fact that you needed at touch screen.

But it'd probably be more likely to see DS games resold as Virtual Console releases, I think.


Mlatador said:
Well, I think Nintendo themselves will make sure that text from HD Graphics will be properly readable in 480i, but I'm not sure about other developers. I've heared of PS3 games that have such problems (where text is barely readable in sub HD).
Click to expand...

Japanese developers and Western PC developers are the BIGGEST offenders when making their text friendly to all resolutions when running on console. MS, Sony, and Nintendo need to start throwing down legibility requirements in the next generation.
 
Donnie said:
Somewhere between 3000-4000mAh (3600mAh maybe) will probably be fine and that's not really huge, or expensive, $5 or so in bulk?
Click to expand...

I don't think it would even need that much. The processor is extremely basic, and the RAM amount should be tiny. If Vita can get away with 2200mAh, this controller will be fine with 2500-3000mAh.
 
AceBandage said:
Merry Christmas, Wii U Speculation thread!
I feel like crap, but I had an awesome day anyway!
:D
Click to expand...

I got the Zelda 3DS. Does that make you feel better?

I also got Skyward Sword, which has made it clear that I'm going to NEED an HDTV for Wii U. :/

So, yeah... My first real playtime with SS. I didn't realize that widescreen is forced in this game. I wonder if all of Nintendo's Wii U games will be widescreen only...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Switch 2 upgrades look worse than Wii U emulation upscaling
2 3 4
198
11K
nkarafo replied
The Switch 2 contains the local streaming tech of the Wii U GamePad, which is how GameShare works
11
867
jshackles replied
[Nintendo Life] Xenoblade Chronicles X Wii U vs Switch graphic comparison
News  2
79
5K
Danjin44 replied
Why did Wii U not benefit from its portable mode?
Opinion Retro Hardware  2
56
3K
Hyet replied
Digital Foundry: Xenoblade Chronicles X Definitive Edition - The Last Wii U To Switch Port Is Excellent
Analysis 
35
2K
IAmRei replied
Top Bottom