Wii U clock speeds are found by marcan

Bit disappointed JordanN couldn't complete Level 1 with his skillz :( Maybe the bonus round will prove easier?

pW23I.jpg
 
MutFox said:
People saying that the Wii U isn't next gen? WTF?
A new way to play is "Next-Gen"
Click to expand...

a new generation is just the next fully new system in line of a succession of consoles. It's not related to 'new ways to play' or 'power', not as it has been described classically to videogame consoles anyway.

I do think saying Wii U doesn't have "next-generation technology" is perhaps passable, though
 
Asherdude said:
Nintendo did the same thing to the SNES, but it turned out ok. Actually better than OK. But in 1992, the same fears were expressed that I'm seeing today.

Here's a snapshot of EGM's 1992 Buyers Guide stating the same issues that people are having with the Wii U.
1992SNESspecs.jpg


1992Genesisspecs.jpg


EGMs1992rating.jpg
Click to expand...
OMG retro mind freeze coming on! That's so retro...brings back all the warm fuzzies I used to get while (giggle) gaming. Those were really some of the best years. It's amazing when you consider how far gaming has come, to think that discussions in the future would spawn this huge part of the culture that is the console hardware sub culture. Well anyways I'm still learning all the technical aspects....but it just amazes me to think that some seem to have a hard time grasping that wiiu games will not only meet current hd but surpass them in some ways. I'm not saying ps360 will be totally blown outta the water...but in time there should be some noticeable differences. All that really boils down to is Zelda and Monster Hunter running and looking better than they ever have before, to me this is good enough. I'm actually going to put MHP3rd to the test and run it along side MHU to see what we're getting(or not getting) just for fun :)
 
Amir0x said:
a new generation is just the next fully new system in line of a succession of consoles. It's not related to 'new ways to play' or 'power', not as it has been described classically to videogame consoles anyway.

I do think saying Wii U doesn't have "next-generation technology" is perhaps passable, though
Click to expand...

But "next-generation technology" is such a nebulous phrase in itself. It doesn't necessarily refer to raw computational horsepower (which I can only assume is what you're implying). Certainly the WiiU will be heavily outclassed in that area when the new kids stroll into town next year, but I would qualify the near-zero lag tech of the system as "next generation", for example.
 
Perkel said:
People should get over semantics and start to call things what they are. WiiU is just late PS360 era hardware. Nintendo bailed out from normal console cycle with Wii. Calling it next gen won't change the fact that it will play mostly current gen games (if PS420 will be as expected)
Click to expand...

Late? 6 years later is late? Normal cycles are 5 years in this industry. Stop reaching, its a 8th gen console system that offers a tablet controller with new ways of playing games. Current gen games being ported to next gen consoles has been going on for a long time now.
 
Pseudo_Sam said:
But "next-generation technology" is such a nebulous phrase in itself. It doesn't necessarily refer to raw computational horsepower (which I can only assume is what you're implying). Certainly the WiiU will be heavily outclassed in that area when the new kids stroll into town next year, but I would qualify the near-zero lag tech of the system as "next generation", for example.
Click to expand...

Of course, it can include various aspects. Wiimote technology, for example, or whatever. Although I'd put forward that neither the lag issue (which is not 'near zero', by the way) or the Wiipad is new technology in the least.

But it doesn't matter to me anyway, because either way Wii U is a "next-gen system" and will continue to be even when Xbox 720 and PS4 come out.
 
MutFox said:
People saying that the Wii U isn't next gen? WTF?
A new way to play is "Next-Gen"

Yeah, multi platform games with next xbox or ps will look worse on the WiiU,
but so did games on the PS2 compared to the gamecube and xbox.

Though I am certain that some games that come out on Wii U,
will have us wondering how it looks so good on there.
Just like how people are amazed at how good Mario Galaxy looks.

Though if people really want the best looking/performing multi platform title,
they'll obviously get the PC version...

Also, people worried about Bayonetta2 on the Wii U?
It'll be fine, it's being built from the ground up on that console.
All gameplay and design choices will be built around the strengths and weaknesses of the console.
Click to expand...

The Wii U is current gen.

The PS3 & 360 are last gen.

:)
 
syko de4d said:
So, Xbox360 is already next gen after Kinect had launched?
So xbox3 will be next next Gen.
Click to expand...

Launching post launch always segregates the community.
As it won't be something all developers will want to integrate as not everyone will have it.

It's called an add-on.
 
MutFox said:
People saying that the Wii U isn't next gen? WTF?
A new way to play is "Next-Gen"

Yeah, multi platform games with next xbox or ps will look worse on the WiiU,
but so did games on the PS2 compared to the gamecube and xbox.

Though I am certain that some games that come out on Wii U,
will have us wondering how it looks so good on there.
Just like how people are amazed at how good Mario Galaxy looks.

Though if people really want the best looking/performing multi platform title,
they'll obviously get the PC version...

Also, people worried about Bayonetta2 on the Wii U?
It'll be fine, it's being built from the ground up on that console.
All gameplay and design choices will be built around the strengths and weaknesses of the console.
Click to expand...
The Wii U is not the PS2 to your Gamecube and Xbox,
The Wii U is the Wii to your PS3 and 360.

I'm sure it will have some very fun games.
Some will have really neat art, and look very nice,
But it's not going to be the ugly duckling of next gen.

Like the Wii, it's going to be a Nintendo box from a bygone era.
A Nintendo box that we expected last generation.
Is that so bad though?
 
TheD said:
*facepalm
The PS3 runs PS2 ports at a much higher res!
Click to expand...
So if the original PS2 games were higher res would the PS3 have more or less trouble running them? Yeah OK...

The WiiU being asked to run ports at the same res doesn't negate the difficulty of running games that weren't built from the ground up on that system.
 
Asherdude said:
Nintendo did the same thing to the SNES, but it turned out ok. Actually better than OK. But in 1992, the same fears were expressed that I'm seeing today.

Here's a snapshot of EGM's 1992 Buyers Guide stating the same issues that people are having with the Wii U.
1992SNESspecs.jpg


1992Genesisspecs.jpg


EGMs1992rating.jpg
Click to expand...

This reminds me of a great thread posted by EmCeeGamer back in July -
The more things change, the more they stay the same: Usenet posts from rec.games.video

Your scans perhaps help illustrate that the same is true of gaming related journalism!
 
Arkam said:
Yea that's not true. Was more or less same CPU whole time. Only real CPU change was the clock speed was raised 25% between I believe Cat-Dev V3 and V4.
Click to expand...

Interesting. When did V4 come out again?

I wonder if it was developer requests that led them to alter this (like the sticks/pads), they always intended to raise it, or something else.
 
Fancy Corndog said:
The Wii U is not the PS2 to your Gamecube and Xbox.
The Wii U is the Wii to your PS3 and 360.

I'm sure it will have some very fun games.
Some will have really neat art, and look very nice.
But it's not going to be the ugly duckling of next gen.

Like the Wii, it's going to be a Nintendo box from a bygone era.
A Nintendo box that we expected last generation.
Is that so bad though?
Click to expand...

It isn't, provided they put a similar amount of effort (in terms of marketing, mostly, but definitely in terms of inflating the budget for their games) into their original hardcore titles as they do to their casual stuff.

What I still do not understand is after all this time, I mean we're talking like over ten years now, of constantly whoring out its core stable of franchises to the detriment of anything original with big budgets, that it's something everyone is still OK with. Sony is in a shit hole and they're constantly investing in new original IPs with some considerable risk involved. Nintendo, with their boundless talent and much better financial situation, can't take some time to reinvent themselves regarding hardcore games? To create truly new and original products, inspired perhaps by the challenge core of their NES days? To me there's little downside: people trust Nintendo and if they marketed the games big, they're sure to add new core IPs that are also fantastic quality-wise for the foreseeable future. And what that does is continue to build the brand value for their new systems, but ensuring games that nobody else can have.

Everytime I say this people always just say to me 'as long as they keep making great Mario games, I don't mind', but I always just think 'why can't they do both? Why can't they expand a bit and create all these new things alongside Zelda and Metroid and Mario?' It's always either/or in some people's minds.

I mean it's sad that at this stage we can probably expect an average of 6 games with Mario in them per year, and yet this is still a problem for them.

My point is...

I mean obviously Wii U clock speeds are not going to help them with this problem one way or another, but if they expanded their stable of core IPs with big marketing budgets, I think people would probably stop obsessing over it as much. Because one of the big reasons people are obsessing over it is because they are hoping third parties can fill in the massive gaps in Nintendo's catalog, and if the system is hideously underpowered, it might end up in a situation like last gen.

If Nintendo can invest in stuff like Xenoblade and more often, and then push it with real marketing budgets (imagine a marketing budget for Xenoblade that rivaled the one for Wii Sports Resort?), things would be a lot brighter I'd say.
 
Arkam said:
Yea that's not true. Was more or less same CPU whole time. Only real CPU change was the clock speed was raised 25% between I believe Cat-Dev V3 and V4.
Click to expand...

Was anything downgraded in the developementcircle (GPU or whatever). I want to see that Zelda Demo to be triumphed by the real game :P
 
gryz said:
maybe you should have refrained from posting then
Click to expand...

Alright, I'll put some words to it so my post has more value. I'm speechless, flabergasted, surprised.

I know the source of the info says to avoid comparisons with the other consoles on the market... but I just don't see how this can be seen in a positive light.
 
Well the SNES could overcome the slow CPU problems by using DSP chips like the Super FX chip. They were already using DSP chips for early titles like F-Zero. Which made cartridges more expensive.
 
Saint Gregory said:
So if the original PS2 games were higher res would the PS3 have more or less trouble running them? Yeah OK...

The WiiU being asked to run ports at the same res doesn't negate the difficulty of running games that weren't built from the ground up on that system.
Click to expand...

WTF are you on about?

Rush2thestart Falsely compared the PS3 running PS2 ports to the WiiU running ports from other systems by saying that the PS3 sometimes has trouble, but forgetting the fact that the PS3 is running the games at a much higher res! (and thus doing much more work).

Dicer said:
But in reality, it's not bad...Unless you look at clock speeds as your only basis for anything.
Click to expand...

In reality, a very old CPU with basic OoOE is unlikely to be able to keep up with an other CPU running at nearly 3 times it's clock speed, even if it does not have OoOE.
 
Durante said:
Seriously now? Go back in time a few months and post that the Wii U CPU runs at 1.2 GHz in one of the speculation threads. I dare you.

Choosing a different but functionally equivalent mainboard and HDD gets me to 169€ (without a case, just the components). Note that this thing has 1GB of GDDR5 in addition to its main 2GB GDDR3 pool though, and the CPU is much (much) faster.
Click to expand...

I mentioned in the wust a rumor the cpu wasn't even quite 1 ghz...wasn't far off.
 
People need to stop calling Wii U "not next gen".

It is next gen.

It's just weak as fuck. I think "weak as fuck" is acceptable. Any objections?
 
Amir0x said:
My point is...

I mean obviously Wii U clock speeds are not going to help them with this problem one way or another, but if they expanded their stable of core IPs with big marketing budgets, I think people would probably stop obsessing over it as much. Because one of the big reasons people are obsessing over it is because they are hoping third parties can fill in the massive gaps in Nintendo's catalog, and if the system is hideously underpowered, it might end up in a situation like last gen.

If Nintendo can invest in stuff like Xenoblade and more often, and then push it with real marketing budgets (imagine a marketing budget for Xenoblade that rivaled the one for Wii Sports Resort?), things would be a lot brighter I'd say.
Click to expand...

Jup, they should market their "coregames", but they also should give them a better treatment with money (budget for developing the game). Xenoblade was looking great at times, but sometimes.... (the animations :x etc.)
 
Hcoregamer00 said:
Yup!

Last generation: DS, PSP, Wii, PS3, 360

Current Generation: 3DS, Vita, Wii U, PS4 (or whatever it is called), and XBOX 720 (or whatever it is called).
Click to expand...
I don't think that makes much sense when the PS3 has a better line-up for 2013 announced than the WiiU (better-looking games too)
 
Van Owen said:
No.
Click to expand...

What people then? Because most of the "loonies" thought it would be less. At the very end there were some talks about 600 MHz, to which Matt responded it would be a little less... so then they stuck to something close to 600. Prior to that, 600 was really the top of what was thought feasible.
 
NES:
Controller with d-pad, two main buttons, two auxiliary buttons

SNES:
Adds two additional main buttons and two shoulder buttons.

N64:
Adds and analog stick, a third trigger, one more auxiliary button

GCN:
Adds a second analog stick, reduces auxiliary buttons

Wii:
Adds accelerometer, gyroscopes, IR pointer, reduces main buttons, increase auxiliary buttons, removes a trigger and an analog stick.

Wii U:
Reverts back to GCN controller as base, adds a touchscreen, accelerometer, and gyroscopes, adds fourth trigger/shoulder button, adds a stylus

The point here being that every generation, Nintendo changes it's input mechanisms (which necessarily changes the types of games that are made). Compare this to Microsoft or Sony, who keep the same inputs (for the most part) and their innovations come more from hardware power increases or OS changes.
 
Amir0x said:
It isn't, provided they put a similar amount of effort (in terms of marketing, mostly, but definitely in terms of inflating the budget for their games) into their original hardcore titles as they do to their casual stuff.

What I still do not understand is after all this time, I mean we're talking like over ten years now, of constantly whoring out its core stable of franchises to the detriment of anything original with big budgets, that it's something everyone is still OK with. Sony is in a shit hole and they're constantly investing in new original IPs with some considerable risk involved. Nintendo, with their boundless talent and much better financial situation, can't take some time to reinvent themselves regarding hardcore games? To create truly new and original products, inspired perhaps by the challenge core of their NES days? To me there's little downside: people trust Nintendo and if they marketed the games big, they're sure to add new core IPs that are also fantastic quality-wise for the foreseeable future. And what that does is continue to build the brand value for their new systems, but ensuring games that nobody else can have.

Everytime I say this people always just say to me 'as long as they keep making great Mario games, I don't mind', but I always just think 'why can't they do both? Why can't they expand a bit and create all these new things alongside Zelda and Metroid and Mario?' It's always either/or in some people's minds.

I mean it's sad that at this stage we can probably expect an average of 6 games with Mario in them per year, and yet this is still a problem for them.

My point is...

I mean obviously Wii U clock speeds are not going to help them with this problem one way or another, but if they expanded their stable of core IPs with big marketing budgets, I think people would probably stop obsessing over it as much. Because one of the big reasons people are obsessing over it is because they are hoping third parties can fill in the massive gaps in Nintendo's catalog, and if the system is hideously underpowered, it might end up in a situation like last gen.

If Nintendo can invest in stuff like Xenoblade and more often, and then push it with real marketing budgets (imagine a marketing budget for Xenoblade that rivaled the one for Wii Sports Resort?), things would be a lot brighter I'd say.
Click to expand...

I would say that overall, Nintendo's first party output this gen has been of higher quality than Sony's. Yes Sony has invested in new IPs this generation, but other than maybe Uncharted none of them were real hits.

Plus, Nintendo did all the new IP inventing they needed for a sales standpoint with games like Wii Fit that sold 40 million copies. The Mario and Mario Kart franchises have also sold more copies than ever. I imagine a massive chunk of people who buy the NSMB games haven't played a Mario game since the NES, and that a significant portion of those 30 million who bought Mario Kart Wii never played one of those games before. Nintendo kinda brought those IPs to a whole new audience.

But yeah I see what you're saying. Nintendo wants to grab back the hardcore this gen with the Wii U and it would be nice if they basically took the same IP strategy that worked with casuals and apply it to the hardcore - invest in a hit franchise. Thinking about it now, I honestly hope they do try that, but I also know it would have to be a surefire goddamn hit -- like a 5-10 million seller. In Nintendo's eyes it would also probably have to do something really new. Wii Fit did something new in the eyes of the casuals who bought it, so did Gears and Halo when they initially launched (to those who hadn't really played first person shooters or Winback or Killswitch). It would have to make enough of an impact to create a new market for core gamers on their platform. Can Nintendo, or any other company Nintendo might go into a publishing deal with, really do that?
 
Anth0ny said:
People need to stop calling Wii U "not next gen".

It is next gen.

It's just weak as fuck. I think "weak as fuck" is acceptable. Any objections?
Click to expand...
Honestly, I think there are two legitimate ways to look at it. I've changed my mind on this and I prefer the chronological usage, but it's not incorrect to speak about hardware generations in terms of technology. The line is made especially blurry considering the Wii U library may very well end up having more in common with PS3/360 than PS4/720.

I don't think it's something to argue over.
 
Evilink said:
OMG retro mind freeze coming on! That's so retro...brings back all the warm fuzzies I used to get while (giggle) gaming. Those were really some of the best years. It's amazing when you consider how far gaming has come, to think that discussions in the future would spawn this huge part of the culture that is the console hardware sub culture. Well anyways I'm still learning all the technical aspects....but it just amazes me to think that some seem to have a hard time grasping that wiiu games will not only meet current hd but surpass them in some ways. I'm not saying ps360 will be totally blown outta the water...but in time there should be some noticeable differences. All that really boils down to is Zelda and Monster Hunter running and looking better than they ever have before, to me this is good enough. I'm actually going to put MHP3rd to the test and run it along side MHU to see what we're getting(or not getting) just for fun :)
Click to expand...
I'm waiting for someone to suggest that the 360 has "blast processing".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hell Clock launches June 18
0
58
Hideous Snake replied
What's exactly up with download speeds on Xbox?
27
421
Kacho replied
Switch 2 upgrades look worse than Wii U emulation upscaling
2 3 4
198
10K
nkarafo replied
A wii build of Battlefront III has been found from 2008
10
1K
Woopah replied
PSA: ISP port reset for better gaming and speeds
3
376
Ozzy Onya A2Z replied
Top Bottom