Support NeoGAF

[DICKS AHOY]

Potentially dumb question here or already answered, but if the Wii U tablet even when merely serving as a menu screen apparently hogs up some level of resources from the main console, would developers suddenly have more to work with if they completely disregarded the controller? As in, their games didn't use the tablet at all? I'm just kind of confused about how having a weaker CPU due to two screens than the 360 but a stronger graphics card would pan things out.

 

[2MF]

Potentially dumb question here or already answered, but if the Wii U tablet even when merely serving as a menu screen apparently hogs up some level of resources from the main console, would developers suddenly have more to work with if they completely disregarded the controller? As in, their games didn't use the tablet at all? I'm just kind of confused about how having a weaker CPU due to two screens than the 360 but a stronger graphics card would pan things out.

Speaking as a programmer, I don't see any reason why displaying a simple menu on the tablet would hog any significant CPU / GPU resources (other than a little memory which should also be near-negligible).

 

[rdrr gnr]

Potentially dumb question here or already answered, but if the Wii U tablet even when merely serving as a menu screen apparently hogs up some level of resources from the main console, would developers suddenly have more to work with if they completely disregarded the controller? As in, their games didn't use the tablet at all? I'm just kind of confused about how having a weaker CPU due to two screens than the 360 but a stronger graphics card would pan things out.

I think that would a marginal amount of resources.

Edit: Speculation validated.

 

[Hoo-doo]

Potentially dumb question here or already answered, but if the Wii U tablet even when merely serving as a menu screen apparently hogs up some level of resources from the main console, would developers suddenly have more to work with if they completely disregarded the controller? As in, their games didn't use the tablet at all? I'm just kind of confused about how having a weaker CPU due to two screens than the 360 but a stronger graphics card would pan things out.

I don't think Nintendo will allow for games to simply turn off the screen completely.

I mean, it's the defining feature of the console. If devs all say fuck it to the tablet features, then all you are left with is a souped up Xbox 360, 7 years late.

 

[Emitan]

I don't think Nintendo will allow for games to simply turn off the screen completely.

Yes they will. They are selling a controller without a screen for those people.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

I don't think Nintendo will allow for games to simply turn off the screen completely.

I mean, it's the defining feature of the console. If devs all say fuck it to the tablet features, then all you are left with is a souped up Xbox 360, 7 years late.

There were tons of Wii Games which featured zero motion controls though. Obviously not from Nintendo, but I don't remember any in say, Capcom vs Tatsunoko.

EDIT: Beaten

 

[Type_Raver]

CPU power is disheartening, hard to imagine very many on-screen objects with similar - let alone more advanced physics and animations. Im afraid its going to look stiff (animations) in comparison to the next gen ps360's, yet relatively polished at the same time.

Happy to be proven wrong.

 

[FyreWulff]

I don't think Nintendo will allow for games to simply turn off the screen completely.

I mean, it's the defining feature of the console. If devs all say fuck it to the tablet features, then all you are left with is a souped up Xbox 360, 7 years late.

Wii U Pro Controller says to me that developers will be allowed to ignore the screen.

 

[sakipon]

Wii U Pro Controller says to me that developers will be allowed to ignore the screen.

I think that's an optional control method though. Devs will probably be forced to invent something for the gamers that prefer to use the GamePad. Whether it's anything substancial is another question.

 

[Hoo-doo]

Yes they will. They are selling a controller without a screen for those people.

Hmm, you are right, completely forgot about that thing.
Nintendo is taking quite a odd approach with the Wii-U.

 

[GopherD]

I don't think Nintendo will allow for games to simply turn off the screen completely.

I mean, it's the defining feature of the console. If devs all say fuck it to the tablet features, then all you are left with is a souped up Xbox 360, 7 years late.

It is entirely optional which means 3rd party devs will start to ignore it. Which means whatever competitive advantage the machine has will be completely lost. Hence why many of us are extremely concerned about 3rd party support.

 

[disap.ed]

I think that's an optional control method though. Devs will probably be forced to invent something for the gamers that prefer to use the GamePad. Whether it's anything substancial is another question.

Easiest way would be to just show a game logo on the Gamepad

Spoiler

(or ads)

 

[Hoo-doo]

Easiest way would be to just show a game logo on the Gamepad

Spoiler

(or ads)

Lol, ads would be hilarious.

Maybe you can display social feeds on the tablet. Miiverse, your friends list, a chatroom or something. That would be kind of cool.

 

[KageMaru]

My best games last gen and their status now:

FFX: Became linear this gen IIRC FFX was linear as well.
Shadow of the Colossus: Team Ico is dead This is due to their over ambitions, not due to how weak or powerful the hardware is. Same thing happened many times last gen.
Psychonauts: Schaffer still waiting for someone to fund the sequel The game wasn't a success, it's unlikely we would have a sequel regardless.
Resident Evil 4: 'cinematic' RE4 was 'cinematic' as well.
DMC: Bayonetta 2 got cancelled How are current gen systems to blame when the original made profit?
MGS3: So far I have seen more cutscenes in MGS4 than actually playing the game. How is the current gen to blame for this?
Splinter Cell: I stopped caring So sticking with the old formula would have been more 'creative'?
GT3: GT5 didn't make it like 4 years after PS3 launch GT4 had a 3 year dev cycle, 4 years after the PS3's launch date is not bad at all considering what they included in the game.
Onimusha: is dead Again how is this gen to blame for this?
Jak: Uncharted is obviously not what Jak was to Crash So because you don't enjoy the series as much, it's not creative?

And then people play Bioshock and think how 'novel' the experience is; lol

I'm sorry but most of your issues are due to factors other than system power. I also can't see how someone can be so bitter and down on this generation but turn around and be excited for the Wii-U. It makes no sense when the Wii-U will be even more powerful and supposedly power stunts creativity.

 

[Father_Brain]

I'm sorry but most of your issues are due to factors other than system power. I also can't see how someone can be so bitter and down on this generation but turn around and be excited for the Wii-U. It makes no sense when the Wii-U will be even more powerful and supposedly power stunts creativity.

Some of the examples he may be overly simplistic, but it's pretty hard to deny that the retail console gaming sector has become increasingly homogenized over the course of the generation, and that higher budgets (and consequent higher sales thresholds for sufficient profitability) are a major factor. Just read what EA said about Dead Space a few weeks back.

Wii U wouldn't solve this even if the AAA sector were supporting it more enthusiastically, though. It'll take a lot more pain before they change course.

 

[KageMaru]

Some of the examples he may be overly simplistic, but it's pretty hard to deny that the retail console gaming sector has become increasingly homogenized over the course of the generation, and that higher budgets (and consequent higher sales thresholds for sufficient profitability) are a major factor. Just read what EA said about Dead Space a few weeks back.

Wii U wouldn't solve this even if the AAA sector were supporting it more enthusiastically, though. It'll take a lot more pain before they change course.

I agree.

IMO games like Wii Sports and CoD made the biggest impact this gen, regardless of budget. We saw publishers chasing both games to have a piece of that pie. Thankfully we are starting to see that bubble pop and developers moving beyond the scripted narrow design.

 

[Antagon]

I agree.

IMO games like Wii Sports and CoD made the biggest impact this gen, regardless of budget. We saw publishers chasing both games to have a piece of that pie. Thankfully we are starting to see that bubble pop and developers moving beyond the scripted narrow design.

Starting to see that bubble pop? Did I see the same E3 as you?

 

[walking fiend]

What what?

Basically you're asking something that didn't work on the Wii.
Then why would it suddenly work on the Wii U? Where's the difference?

Due to the focus on specific Wii U capabilities, having a very limited installbase, dealing with limited human resources, and increased development costs, I don't think we'll see large investments in separate Wii U development studios. At least not those kind of games the Nintendo crowd wants. Because it's for the most part not in line with the demographic demand.

And if they do ... remember Haze on PS3? You don't want projects like that.

I am not sure if it didn't work. Initially, core games sold very well on the system (RE4 ~2m, NMH being the best selling Suda game, RS ~1.5m, WaW ~1m, etc.); the problem started because: 1. Wii was so outdated that its architecture required new engines 2. Publishers didn't anticipate the success of the console and by the time it installed based grew and weren't ready to support it afterward 3. It had other problems including online and digital distribution infrastructure, lack of patching support, etc.

And another major problem was Nintendo itself; they practically released like 2 important games after 2010 on wii, whether casual or core; I don't know how they expected Wii to conitnue to sell.

I'm sorry but most of your issues are due to factors other than system power. I also can't see how someone can be so bitter and down on this generation but turn around and be excited for the Wii-U. It makes no sense when the Wii-U will be even more powerful and supposedly power stunts creativity.

I'm not 'that' excited for WiiU, but I explained why I believe the power jump of Wii U is [apparently] reasonable and in a good direction [for me at least].

And obviously those problems are not directly related to the power increase, I don't believe power increase per se is a wrong direction, it would be stupid to think so. High costs of taking risks due to the high development costs, requires being very cautious that your games matches the dominant taste of the installed based.

I believe when people buy a system that costs over $400, they obviously expects the retail games to use the strength of the system to its full potential; this put a heavy burden on the developers and publishers. For example regarding The Last Gaurdian, let's assume it's scale is around that of Shadow of The Colossus; how much would it cost to make such a game [in less than a decade, lol], and how much should it sell to break even?

Again, be reminded I am not supposed against Nvidia and Ati making $1000 graphic cards or games being made that utilize them, but it's quite different on PC cause people have a lot of option and a lot of them may have systems without dedicated graphic cards to begin with. But for the next gen most people [both developers and gamers] will be stuck with whatever MS and Sony put into their consoles.

---
I am not sure if Nintendo is trying to attract all the core gamers anyway; I think it's almost impossible to attract the crowd that bought Wii and those who paid $600 for PS3 to begin with [at least unless they come up with a way to heavily subsidize the hardware]. What they are doing, is attracting the same crowd that bought Wii, and give them enough incentive not to move from the Wii. And to say the least, I believe Nintendo not taking a huge jump will at least allow their 1st party, 2nd party and usual 3rd party to support the system the way developers envision and not the way market and hardware dictates; and I certainly hope they feel the pressure enough not to sit on their lazy ass [like they did with 3DS]

Starting to see that bubble pop? Did I see the same E3 as you?

it's because people still buy the games:

Mother Earth is pregnant for the third time
For y'all have knocked her up.

 

[KageMaru]

Starting to see that bubble pop? Did I see the same E3 as you?

I know what you're talking about and agree to an extent, but we also see developers like Cliff voicing out how we need to grow beyond these heavily scripted linear games. We also have games like Dishonored receiving a lot of attention. Maybe "bubble popping" is a bit extreme, but I'm really hoping more developers take notice that there is game design beyond what we see with CoD, Gears, Uncharted, etc.

I'm not 'that' excited for WiiU, but I explained why I believe the power jump of Wii U is [apparently] reasonable and in a good direction [for me at least].

And obviously those problems are not directly related to the power increase, I don't believe power increase per se is a wrong direction, it would be stupid to think so. High costs of taking risks due to the high development costs, requires being very cautious that your games matches the dominant taste of the installed based.

I believe when people buy a system that costs over $400, they obviously expects the retail games to use the strength of the system to its full potential; this put a heavy burden on the developers and publishers. For example regarding The Last Gaurdian, let's assume it's scale is around that of Shadow of The Colossus; how much would it cost to make such a game [in less than a decade, lol], and how much should it sell to break even?

Again, be reminded I am not supposed against Nvidia and Ati making $1000 graphic cards or games being made that utilize them, but it's quite different on PC cause people have a lot of option and a lot of them may have systems without dedicated graphic cards to begin with. But for the next gen most people [both developers and gamers] will be stuck with whatever MS and Sony put into their consoles.

---
I am not sure if Nintendo is trying to attract all the core gamers anyway; I think it's almost impossible to attract the crowd that bought Wii and those who paid $600 for PS3 to begin with [at least unless they come up with a way to heavily subsidize the hardware]. What they are doing, is attracting the same crowd that bought Wii, and give them enough incentive not to move from the Wii. And to say the least, I believe Nintendo not taking a huge jump will at least allow their 1st party, 2nd party and usual 3rd party to support the system the way developers envision and not the way market and hardware dictates; and I certainly hope they feel the pressure enough not to sit on their lazy ass [like they did with 3DS]

So pushing high end graphics is only ok on the PC or are you saying that it's better to have a more modest bump in performance seen in the Wii-U? Can't really agree with either.

No one is forcing console developers to blow up budgets and budgets aren't always tied to pretty graphics, just look at GR:FS.

The Wii-U will benefit from all the lessons learned and experience gained from this gen, but so will the other next gen systems.

 

[StevieP]

Wouldn't Wii U already have a sizeable performance increase even if the CPU is just as powerful as Xenos? From what I understand, the Wii U Will offload the majority of stuff that was donecon Xenos (sound, OS, physics) to other chips. That alone could lead up to a 2-3x performance gain.

Yeah, I thought I'd read people saying it has a dedicated DSP and I/O processor so none of those functions would use the CPU. That alone should give it a boost over the 360/PS3 even if it's only up to par, shouldn't it?

The problem is that most middleware doesn't yet have support for the secondary processors such as the DSP. This will improve and be remedied in time, but that is *one* of the reasons why you hear devs whining.

IIRC, there are games on the 360 that would take up an entire CPU core just for audio.

I'm skeptical that 1st party WiiU games will be that impressive, not unless Ninty hires a bunch of PS360 programmers for their teams.

They have.

I know what you're talking about and agree to an extent, but we also see developers like Cliff voicing out how we need to grow beyond these heavily scripted linear games.

Actions speak louder than words, Cliffy.

No one is forcing console developers to blow up budgets and budgets aren't always tied to pretty graphics, just look at GR:FS.

Us hardcore gamers are "forcing" console developers to blow up budgets. See: thread reveals for games like P-100.

 

[walking fiend]

So pushing high end graphics is only ok on the PC or are you saying that it's better to have a more modest bump in performance seen in the Wii-U? Can't really agree with either.

My argument is centered around the hardware; PC is full of option and so there are games for people who want high end graphics and of course the hardware that supports it, while the best selling games still have modest hardware requirement.

No one is forcing console developers to blow up budgets and budgets aren't always tied to pretty graphics, just look at GR:FS.

I am pretty certain people 'prefer' their games to utilize the hardware they have bought to a good extent, regardless of how powerful the hardware is, that is not only on HD consoles, but on Wii, on DS, etc.

However, when they pay a steep premium price just because the hardwares are graphically very capable, they will specially 'expect' very good graphics from their games. Of course this is logical, or otherwise the price they paid would have been wasted [though initially supporting this notion and being willing to pay a steep cost for the graphical power, may not be logical]

Of course there are exceptions to this; there are major games with modest graphics and experimental mechanics that sell quite good, such as Portal, but they are exceptions and most developers and publishers can't afford taking such risks (like how even Dice and EA are not willing to make Mirror's Edge 2, or how they are suggesting changes in DS series, etc.)

---
I believe, when someone buys 3DS instead of Vita, he is saying that my priority is NOT graphics; that's a very strong message to the developers.

The Wii-U will benefit from all the lessons learned and experience gained from this gen, but so will the other next gen systems.

I hope so.

 

[test_account]

Oh, I'm not saying it's higher performance, I don't know. It's definitely some very competitive memory they put in though.

Fair enough Would be interesting to know more about the technical stuff, pity that Nintendo and Sony doesnt give more info around this type of things.

 

[AzaK]

I think that's an optional control method though. Devs will probably be forced to invent something for the gamers that prefer to use the GamePad. Whether it's anything substancial is another question.

Devs will have to put a bit of time into it for sure, which is a concern as they tend to want to do the least possible unless some money changes hands. However, I just hope they realise that they can do something simple. I don't expect game changing control mechanisms in my third party ports. All I expect are the ports. Fuck, I'd be happy if all GTA V had on the controller was a splash screen if it meant I got the game on Wii U.

The only real concern I have with Wii U, to the point I can overlook everything else, is that it gets PS60 up ports and PS420 downports.

 

[Dan Yo]

This console is really turning out to be one confusing clusterfuck. What with Wii U's hardware bottlenecks and Nintendo not even sure which controller they want to commit to. The latter in particular I foresee becoming very confusing for casuals.

 

[KageMaru]

Us hardcore gamers are "forcing" console developers to blow up budgets.

That's why CoD is one of the best selling IPs this Gen, right?

My argument is centered around the hardware; PC is full of option and so there are games for people who want high end graphics and of course the hardware that supports it, while the best selling games still have modest hardware requirement.

The same options exist on consoles as well, see the success of games like minecraft or castle crashers.

 

[H_Prestige]

This console is really turning out to be one confusing clusterfuck. What with Wii U's hardware bottlenecks and Nintendo not even sure which controller they want to commit to. The latter in particular I foresee becoming very confusing for casuals.

TBH, I see this console easily crushing the next gen consoles. Not only will it be the cheapest, but it will also be the least gimmicky. MS seems like they're making some super expensive kinect/tablet/motion gaming freak show of a system. And Sony just has zero vision ever since they got rid of Kutaragi, so at most they'll deliver some copycat machine.

 

[2MF]

And Sony just has zero vision ever since they got rid of Kutaragi, so at most they'll deliver some copycat machine.

What vision? Losing Kutaragi should not make much difference. Sony machines have always been copycat machines. The controller is always an incremental change from the PS1 controller. They were not first with online either.

The only unique stuff Sony did as far as Playstation hardware was irrelevant stuff like the Cell (which is more trouble than it's worth) and using Blu-Ray which was not a big deal either.

Correct me if I'm wrong of course, but I can't think of a single instance of Kutaragi's vision actually mattering much...

 

[H_Prestige]

What vision? Losing Kutaragi should not make much difference. Sony machines have always been copycat machines. The controller is always an incremental change from the PS1 controller. They were not first with online either.

The only unique stuff Sony did as far as Playstation hardware was irrelevant stuff like the Cell (which is more trouble than it's worth) and using Blu-Ray which was not a big deal either.

Correct me if I'm wrong of course, but I can't think of a single instance of Kutaragi's vision actually mattering much...

You don't think the ps1 and ps2 were visionary hardware? Not sure what they were copying off of, especially ps1.

As for ps3, it was basically the blueprint for next gen hardware in terms of feature set. The Wii U console is drawing a lot of influence from it.

 

[2MF]

You don't think the ps1 and ps2 were visionary hardware? Not sure what they were copying off of, especially ps1.

As for ps3, it was basically the blueprint for next gen hardware in terms of feature set. The Wii U console is drawing a lot of influence from it.

PS1 maybe in some aspects. But after that not so much. What did the PS2 or PS3 do which required real vision?

In what way does the Wii U draw influence from the PS3 specifically?

 

[KageMaru]

You don't think the ps1 and ps2 were visionary hardware? Not sure what they were copying off of, especially ps1.

As for ps3, it was basically the blueprint for next gen hardware in terms of feature set. The Wii U console is drawing a lot of influence from it.

IIRC Sony looked at the SNES controller when designing the ps1 controller. Though I agree the ps1 and ps2 weren't copy cat machines.

The ps3? Motion controls and home button were definitely influenced by the competition.

Not really sure how the ps3 is a blueprint for next Gen though.

Also I was a huge fan of Ken during the ps1 days. He was big on the concept of an efficient yet powerful system will relatively good tools. That all went to shit with the ps2 and ps3.

 

[Forsaken82]

I think that's an optional control method though. Devs will probably be forced to invent something for the gamers that prefer to use the GamePad. Whether it's anything substancial is another question.

Why should they be forced to do such a thing? The tablet is (as far as we know) packed in with the system, making it the default control scheme, with or without touch screen/second screen capabilities. If a developer thinks their game plays best with a Pro controller, they aren't going to waste time shoehorning some bullshit feature for the tablet users, instead they are simply going to make sure that any Pro Controller inputs can be properly emulated on the tablet controller.

Think about it... why should developers be Forced to use the second screen when games can be streamed TO the second screen... how does the second screens usefulness come into play if you are currently using the controller as your means of both viewing and playing the game?

 

[H_Prestige]

PS1 maybe in some aspects. But after that not so much. What did the PS2 or PS3 do which required real vision?

In what way does the Wii U draw influence from the PS3 specifically?

Bluray, HDMI, and full downloadable games come to mind. These things don't seem like a big deal anymore because they're commonplace, but to offer them way back in 2006 had to take some vision about where gaming would be a few years down the line. Another forward thinking move was getting rid of region locking. Also the first to offer backward compatibility.

I don't see anything forward thinking about the Vita. It's just a PSP with a flash cards and dual analog sticks.

 

[KingJ2002]

any chances nintendo will address the cpu issue... or is this a "deal with it" senario?

 

[Dan Yo]

TBH, I see this console easily crushing the next gen consoles. Not only will it be the cheapest, but it will also be the least gimmicky. MS seems like they're making some super expensive kinect/tablet/motion gaming freak show of a system. And Sony just has zero vision ever since they got rid of Kutaragi, so at most they'll deliver some copycat machine.

How do you know it'll be the cheapest? The other console manufacturers are more willing and able to sell at a loss.

I don't know why you consider the Wii U to be the least gimmicky. It's entire selling point is based on a gimmick. They're certainly not going to be selling systems based on the graphical capabilities. At least the other consoles will have the generational leap of power and visuals to fall back on.

 

[donny2112]

Not sure what they were copying off of, especially ps1.

PS1 is the result of the cancelled CD-ROM add-on for the SNES.

 

[H_Prestige]

How do you know it'll be the cheapest? The other console manufacturers are more willing and able to sell at a loss.

I don't know why you consider the Wii U to be the least gimmicky. It's entire selling point is based on a gimmick. They're certainly not going to be selling systems based on the graphical capabilities. At least the other consoles will have the generational leap of power and visuals to fall back on.

When has nintendo ever not had the cheapest console? MS and Sony do sell at a loss, but they also target higher retail prices with a plan to reduce over time. Nintendo likes to start cheap and stay cheap. That's a better strategy IMO, especially nowadays when people don't have as much money to spend on toys.

I don't see any gimmick in the wii u. The wii was built around a gimmick, but this looks like a garden variety HD console, dual analog controls and all. Slapping an LCD onto the controller doesn't really change that. Didn't the dreamcast even have some kind of display on the pad?

PS1 is the result of the cancelled CD-ROM add-on for the SNES.

So ps1 copied itself? What?

There was the SNES and Genesis before the ps1 launched, neither of which seem anything like the ps1. Which also offered dual analog controls, which became the dominant control method ever since.

 

[KageMaru]

Bluray, HDMI, and full downloadable games come to mind. These things don't seem like a big deal anymore because they're commonplace, but to offer them way back in 2006 had to take some vision about where gaming would be a few years down the line. Another forward thinking move was getting rid of region locking. Also the first to offer backward compatibility.

I don't see anything forward thinking about the Vita. It's just a PSP with a flash cards and dual analog sticks.

The 360 has both HDMI and offers full game downloads. The ps3 isn't acting as a blueprint for anything, this is all just the natural progression of where things have been heading for a while now.

There was the SNES and Genesis before the ps1 launched, neither of which seem anything like the ps1. Which also offered dual analog controls, which became the dominant control method ever since.

Ps1 got analog sticks as a result to Sega and Nintendo releasing analog controllers. You're giving Sony way too much credit here, but this is GAF after all.

 

[donny2112]

There was the SNES and Genesis before the ps1 launched, neither of which seem anything like the ps1.

This is well-known. Surprised you didn't already know.

Sony and Nintendo were working on a CD-ROM add-on for SNES. However, it was cancelled at the last minute with Nintendo going to Panasonic due to the licensing terms being way in favor of Sony. Basically Sony would license all the games put on the CD-ROM making Nintendo almost a third-party on its own system. Therefore, Nintendo stabbed Sony in the back at CES (I think) announcing their Panasonic partnership. Sony took the CD-ROM add-on and made it into the first Playstation.

http://www.consoledatabase.com/consoleinfo/snescdrom/

 

[blu]

A picture is worth a thousand words or so, they say ; )

 

[Always-honest]

any chances nintendo will address the cpu issue... or is this a "deal with it" senario?

if true, then it's DEAL WITH IT, since it's Nintendo.

 

[donny2112]

A picture is worth a thousand words or so, they say ; )

Fixed. Glad the replacement image wasn't something bannable. :lol

 

[specialguy]

any chances nintendo will address the cpu issue... or is this a "deal with it" senario?

way too late to do anything now, people underestimate the lead times in hardware, theyre huge, like two years (except for ram)

the wii u is probably close to production, or maybe in production, it launches in 4 months

 

[H_Prestige]

This is well-known. Surprised you didn't already know.

Sony and Nintendo were working on a CD-ROM add-on for SNES. However, it was cancelled at the last minute with Nintendo going to Panasonic due to the licensing terms being way in favor of Sony. Basically Sony would license all the games put on the CD-ROM making Nintendo almost a third-party on its own system. Therefore, Nintendo stabbed Sony in the back at CES (I think) announcing their Panasonic partnership. Sony took the CD-ROM add-on and made it into the first Playstation.

http://www.consoledatabase.com/consoleinfo/snescdrom/

I know about the CD add on. You were implying the sony ps1 was a copycat machine by referencing a sony developed snes add on that never made it market and eventually turned into the ps1.

 

[H_Prestige]

The 360 has both HDMI and offers full game downloads. The ps3 isn't acting as a blueprint for anything, this is all just the natural progression of where things have been heading for a while now.

Where was HDMI at launch? IIRC MS only introduced it a couple of years later, after ps3 launched. And if Sony didn't take the hit on bluray already and got the format out there, where would Nintendo be getting these 25GB discs from?

Ps1 got analog sticks as a result to Sega and Nintendo releasing analog controllers. You're giving Sony way too much credit here, but this is GAF after all.

single analog=/=dual analog

Nintendo gets credit for introducing the analog stick, but they failed to realize that for 3D games you need two of them. Otherwise the user experience is hampered. Now that I think about it, isn't the wii u their first ever console based around dual analog controls? So they're really late to the party here.

 

[Forsaken82]

Where was HDMI at launch? IIRC MS only introduced it a couple of years later, after ps3 launched. And if Sony didn't take the hit on bluray already and got the format out there, where would Nintendo be getting these 25GB discs from?


single analog=/=dual analog

Nintendo gets credit for introducing the analog stick, but they failed to realize that for 3D games you need two of them. Otherwise the user experience is hampered. Now that I think about it, isn't the wii u their first ever console based around dual analog controls? So they're really late to the party here.

Uhh... Was the Nipple on the GC controller not a true analog stick?

 

[SlickShoesRUCrazy]

Where was HDMI at launch? IIRC MS only introduced it a couple of years later, after ps3 launched. And if Sony didn't take the hit on bluray already and got the format out there, where would Nintendo be getting these 25GB discs from?


single analog=/=dual analog

Nintendo gets credit for introducing the analog stick, but they failed to realize that for 3D games you need two of them. Otherwise the user experience is hampered. Now that I think about it, isn't the wii u their first ever console based around dual analog controls? So they're really late to the party here.

gamecube

 

[AzaK]

any chances nintendo will address the cpu issue... or is this a "deal with it" senario?

I heard they are producing a cable to connect from the Wii U USB port, to the 3DS IR port. This way they can offload some of the physics to it.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Where was HDMI at launch? IIRC MS only introduced it a couple of years later, after ps3 launched. And if Sony didn't take the hit on bluray already and got the format out there, where would Nintendo be getting these 25GB discs from?


single analog=/=dual analog

Nintendo gets credit for introducing the analog stick, but they failed to realize that for 3D games you need two of them. Otherwise the user experience is hampered. Now that I think about it, isn't the wii u their first ever console based around dual analog controls? So they're really late to the party here.

Despite the odd appearance, the GCN's C-stick was indeed an analog input device. However, it was a natural progression of the C-buttons already present on the N64 pad, which were intended for camera controls.

 

[StevieP]

Where was HDMI at launch? IIRC MS only introduced it a couple of years later, after ps3 launched. And if Sony didn't take the hit on bluray already and got the format out there, where would Nintendo be getting these 25GB discs from?

Whichever large disc based technology that was out there and mass market. Like they did with DVDs and even mini-DVDs.

 

[TAS]

There was the SNES and Genesis before the ps1 launched, neither of which seem anything like the ps1.

Aside from them copying the SNES controller practically verbatim..no nothing at all.