Wii U clock speeds are found by marcan

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.)

Yeah but Wii was I think pushing up against its technical boundaries with Xenoblade, so I guess some forgiveness is in order :P

Nintendo has a real problem. It may not seem like a problem to some because of how much their stable of franchises continues to sell (even as some series are diminishing... re: Metroid, re: Zelda), but so much could be fixed if they just started to genuinely invest in games with a decent sized budget that were ALSO marketed big.

It's really past the point where it's appropriate for Nintendo to announce a game one month in advance and then release it. There is no buzz, and as the competitors continue to encroach on Nintendo's territory, this is the type of stuff that starts to eat away at a console manufacturer if it's not taken care of.

I mean Yoshi's Land Wii U is just leaking to lists now and will probably be out in a few months time, right?

But as much as I want Yoshi's Land, I far more desire Nintendo to apply their talents to brand new original IPs. I already know what they're capable of when it comes to Mario, Zelda, Metroid, etc; I want to know what they're capable of when they strip any security blanket away and must create a big budget hardcore titles without any Mario, Zelda or Metroid. With a big marketing budget to boot.

If they started doing this, the shift away from people being too concerned about clock speeds and RAM (because we already know Wii U is underpowered) might be something that is advantageous for Nintendo. There has been some negative buzz around Wii U launch because of this stuff, and the many problems with their system (horrendously slow OS, for one).
 
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!
Um, The PS3 is significantly more powerful than a PS2. It shouldn't have the slighest trouble running games that look and run significantly better than PS2 games and does every time a new game is released for it.

So why does it have issues with some PS2 HD ports? It has nothing to do with running the games in higher res and everything to do with having a game directly ported to it from a different architecture. If the games were rebuilt from the ground up, which is probably close to what happened to some of the better collections like ICO/SOTC, then the PS3 wouldn't have had the slightest issue running the games.

That's why it's very silly to make the assumption that the WiiU struggling with current gen ports have anything to do with its hardware. It could very well be an underpowered PoS but use games built for it from the ground up to judge that.
 
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.
F-Zero didn't cost any extra.

Are you saying Wii U should have been a cart system so extra chips could make up for hardware weaknesses?
 
1.2GHZ?! That's just... well... there's really nothing to say...

Well, Nintendo cheaped-out on the CPU, it's the equivalent of a Pentium III, I reckon.
PS2's CPU was the equivalent of a custom Pentium II OC'ed, hmm this ranks Wii-U in-line with a last gen console.
 
But as much as I want Yoshi's Land, I far more desire Nintendo to apply their talents to brand new original IPs. I already know what they're capable of when it comes to Mario, Zelda, Metroid, etc; I want to know what they're capable of when they strip any security blanket away and must create a big budget hardcore titles without any Mario, Zelda or Metroid. With a big marketing budget to boot.
I agree.

In an alternate universe, something like the Portal games would be something that Nintendo could make, for example.
 
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?

Colloquially speaking it is not next gen just like how the wii was not really next gen back in '06. Sure chronoligically it was but it was not going to see any meaningful ports from its peers, isolating it.
 
Um, The PS3 is significantly more powerful than a PS2. It should have the slighest trouble running games that look and run significanly better than PS2 games and does every time a new game is released for it.

So why does it have issues with some PS2 HD ports? It has nothing to do with running the games in higher res and everything to do with having a game directly ported to it from a different architecture. If the games were rebuilt from the ground up, which is probably close to what happened to some of the better collections like ICO/SOTC, then the PS3 wouldn't have had the slightest issue running the games.

That's why it's very silly to make the assumption that the WiiU struggling with current gen ports have anything to do with its hardware. It could very well be an underpowered PoS but use games built for it from the ground up to judge that.

The reason that the PS3 has problems in what.. 1 game (Z.O.E 2)? Is because the PS2 has a very, very different architecture.
It has more frame buffer bandwidth for it's SD res than the PS3 has for 720P, but the PS3 still out performs it (taking into account the res).

Unlike the PS2 vs PS3 (or vs anything), the WiiU is much, much closer to the over consoles (mainly 360).

The games that put effort into using the gamepad for things are clearly not super cheap ports.
 
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.

Right, but sales is not what I am talking about. I am talking about Sony's desire to continually invest in daring original hardcore IPs, even if there is risk involved and even if it ultimately fails. This is a trait Nintendo genuinely could learn from, and if Nintendo did it we would surely be far better off... they have more talent than Sony when it comes to this sort of thing.

As a gamer, that's all I care about. I cannot play sales and sales do not turn me on.

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.

This is part of the problem. The gamers Nintendo appeals to with stuff like Wii Sports Resort and Wii Fit are on average finicky customers who won't stay around long if some new gimmick isn't approaching their ADHD-addled minds. They gave the casuals the attention with the marketing budgets, and for hardcores they pretty much said 'well as long as Zelda or Mario is in the title they'll buy anything.' It was very afterthought-ish.

And yet the stable of hardcore games Nintendo has created remains relevant to everyone's tastes, including hardcores. And they continue to fail to add to this stable. Last generation they spent so much time marketing these cheap, casual shallow titles that obviously held much appeal, but how much of these franchises will now follow into Wii U and have the same impact? I highly doubt it could, because the Wii U pad is the front and center, not the wiimote.

So if Nintendo starts to add to this with compelling big marketed hardcore titles, they will add something that is important: future proofing. Because for as much as Mario and Zelda kick ass, they can only bring systems so far. Nintendo has demonstrated that people expect something more to buy into their units. For Wii it was wiimote; they think for Wii U it'll be the pad. But there are only so many gimmicks they can make. Eventually it is GAMES that will be demanded, and the market will get tired of Mario 8000 and Zelda 2000 and it'll end up with a Gamecube situation at the end.

I think it's fair to say we should expect more from Nintendo, who has more development talent than almost anyone in the industry.

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?

Yes, exactly. You are describing my thought process very well here. And I think that might help avoid the piling on over RAM and CPUs and clock speeds and whatever, because people will then say "well, it may not be the most powerful, but Nintendo is offering games that really appeal to me. They're starting to get bold like the old days."

I think it would be very beneficial going forward. But we'll see. Every gen I hope for this but I do not get satisfied very often. Gamecube actually had a pretty nice stable of bold Nintendo game designs, but I'd like them to even go further. Really focus on shoring up their hardcore fanbase with new IPs that'll hook 'em for another 25 years.
 
I think it would be very beneficial going forward. But we'll see. Every gen I hope for this but I do not get satisfied very often. Gamecube actually had a pretty nice stable of bold Nintendo game designs, but I'd like them to even go further. Really focus on shoring up their hardcore fanbase with new IPs that'll hook 'em for another 25 years.

There is a big problem Nintendo faces when it comes to this. They're forced into make the same old IPs because they need those IPs to sell the system because they have horrible 3rd party support. They need to make the Smash,Animal Crossing, Mario Kart, 3D Mario because people will buy their system for those. So it's a catch 22 situation, where Nintendo could send their development teams to make new IPs, but if they fail Nintendo is screwed. And Nintendo is a big company, but they don't have unlimited resources.
 
There is a big problem Nintendo faces when it comes to this. They're forced into make the same old IPs because they need those IPs to sell the system because they have horrible 3rd party support. They need to make the Smash,Animal Crossing, Mario Kart, 3D Mario because people will buy their system for those. So it's a catch 22 situation, where Nintendo could send their development teams to make new IPs, but if they fail Nintendo is screwed.

What I don't understand is why they just don't expand? They have money and a war chest, and it wouldn't break the bank to expand a few extra teams and train them in the Nintendo development design philosophy, would it?

Then they continue to make those games that they feel sell their systems, while also delivering this new paradigm that might help sell future systems.

It's also important to note that we never know what will sell until it sells. So if Nintendo provided Wii Sports-calibre marketing budgets to critical new hardcore IPs like Xenoblade, we might be discussing a very different perspective altogether imo.
 
The reason that the PS3 has problems in what.. 1 game (Z.O.E 2)? Is because the PS2 has a very, very different architecture.
It has more frame buffer bandwidth for it's SD res than the PS3 has for 720P.

Unlike the PS2 vs PS3 (or vs anything), the WiiU is much, much closer to the 360.

The games that put effort into using the gamepad for things are clearly not super cheap ports.
I've only purchased the Z.O.E., GoW and ICO/SOTC collection but aside from Z.O.E. I've heard nasty issues about the SH collection and DMC collection and in general not a lot of positive reactions to HD cash-ins this gen.

That's really not the point though. A port is a port, being ported from 360 to WiiU (and given what we've learn today I don't understand how you can say they're in any way similar) is no different from a PS2 to PS3 port or a 360 to PC port. Any of those ports could end up buggy and unoptimized if resources aren't available to make them perfect.

I feel like I'm the only one who remembers "Xbox 1.5" from seven years ago :/
 
I want to know what they're capable of when they strip any security blanket away and must create a big budget hardcore titles without any Mario, Zelda or Metroid. With a big marketing budget to boot.


How did Kid Icarus do? That had a pretty big marketing push and was squarely targeted at the hardcore.

Define that 'weak as fuck' if you can.

Normally people start up the hyperbole once the more powerful hardware is in hand. But now they're starting before we even have a Durango or PS4. Which means the 360 and PS3 that everyone thinks are powerful are now weak as fuck. Major cognitive dissonance going on.
 
What I don't understand is why they just don't expand? They have money and a war chest, and it wouldn't break the bank to expand a few extra teams and train them in the Nintendo development design philosophy, would it?

Then they continue to make those games that they feel sell their systems, while also delivering this new paradigm that might help sell future systems.

It's also important to note that we never know what will sell until it sells. So if Nintendo provided Wii Sports-calibre marketing budgets to critical new hardcore IPs like Xenoblade, we might be discussing a very different perspective altogether imo.

Well they have been expanding, but Nintendo is fucking crazy conservative company (which has kept them alive through the rough times) so if they expand too rapidly and they have a down period they will incur even more costs. I've said before though Nintendo is going to have to expand a lot more if they want to survive. Mario will not save them forever. They should be first in line to buy some of those THQ IPs and development studios.
 
How did Kid Icarus do? That had a pretty big marketing push and was squarely targeted at the hardcore.

I don't think it was their most successful game (I remember reading 300,000 units at some point). I think part of it was some people had real problem with what they considered a quite uncomfortable control scheme, so there was some backlash against the title. But I also think they chose a sort of weird game to revive. Kid Icarus has never been hugely popular, at least not anymore. And even still, Kid Icarus was still Nintendo relying on a brand name IP. I know that may seem like a technicality considering how much is new about Kid Icarus, but it is important. It speaks to the level of risk-aversion Nintendo still has.

It's ok to be smart and deploy games with some strategic sense so that you sell, but it's equally a problem when you become so cagey that you don't know how to do anything else.

I am optimistic that because Wii U's pad is a largely traditional controller, they will come up with some new ideas this gen for hardcore games.

Well they have been expanding, but Nintendo is fucking crazy conservative company (which has kept them alive through the rough times) so if they expand too rapidly and they have a down period they will incur even more costs. I've said before though Nintendo is going to have to expand a lot more if they want to survive. Mario will not save them forever. They should be first in line to buy some of those THQ IPs and development studios.

Yeah but are they expanding for new hardcore IPs or just because it takes larger teams to develop HD games?

I agree that their conservative strategy has helped them well through the hard times, but eventually it becomes a hindrance rather than a benefit when that is all you start to know how to do. Nintendo has so much talent, and you can see it seeping through the games they do aim at us, but to see them approach hardcore games with a genuinely blank slate with the intention of marketing them as hard as Wii Sports? That would warm my heart so much.

And since Nintendoland is the pack in with Wii U, it's not like they're forgetting the casuals. They are still clearly having that strategy in their pocket. So I hope they can address us next, because honestly I am tired of visiting the Mushroom Kingdom. ESPECIALLY when it looks as bland as some of the games with "New" in the title. ;)
 
I don't think it was their most successful game (I remember reading 300,000 units at some point). I think part of it was some people had real problem with what they considered a quite uncomfortable control scheme, so there was some backlash against the title. But I also think they chose a sort of weird game to revive. Kid Icarus has never been hugely popular, at least not anymore. And even still, Kid Icarus was still Nintendo relying on a brand name IP. I know that may seem like a technicality considering how much is new about Kid Icarus, but it is important. It speaks to the level of risk-aversion Nintendo still has.

It's ok to be smart and deploy games with some strategic sense so that you sell, but it's equally a problem when you become so cagey that you don't know how to do anything else.

I am optimistic that because Wii U's pad is a largely traditional controller, they will come up with some new ideas this gen for hardcore games.

Just curious. I am by no means suggesting they start and end with Kid Icarus. Its the first thing that comes to mind. It has a huge amount of content, and obviously got the full marketing push, cartoons, stands in Best Buy, demos, etc.

If it didn't live up to expectations, that's a bad omen for new IPs. After all, it was a respected developer of a multi-million dollar series coupled with a franchise that, while it has little broader cache, should've at least garnered attention from the gaming press that would ask for it every couple E3's.

I agree 100% with you Re: expansion. I'm a huge proponent of aggressive expansion (whether internal or consuming studios like MonolithSoft or Next Level or Monster). I see no reason why Nintendo shouldn't be releasing one retail title a month for both of their platforms, even if that includes smaller C-tier titles like Mario Tennis. That's a milestone they should've been striving to reach since they saw the writing on the wall with the latter days of N64.
 
So, this article was real after all?

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-04-09-wii-u-may-retail-for-USD300

The web site quotes their source as saying "Cutting production costs to maximize profits is Nintendo's main concern with the Wii U. They are cutting costs in the Wii U's hardware to build back confidence in investors. Nintendo wants investors to view Wii U as a less risky proposition."

The report's sources give more detail about the components. "Nintendo chose an economical GPU and CPU that could keep up with the performance of today's current consoles, but keep hardware costs down to maximize profits. Nintendo got a bargain price on the custom GPU and CPU that the Wii U uses. There is a bigger focus on downloadable content, applications, video content, digital distribution, and services to create a stream of revenue. Investors will be ecstatic with the news."
 
Well, Nintendo cheaped-out on the CPU, it's the equivalent of a Pentium III, I reckon.
PS2's CPU was the equivalent of a custom Pentium II OC'ed, hmm this ranks Wii-U in-line with a last gen console.

You need to stay the fuck out of any technical discussion then because that statement just makes you look like an ignoramus.

N64 had 3X the clockspeed of Playstation yet I never remember people calling the playstation last gen upon the arrival of the n64.

Comparing spec numbers between different architectures is completely pointless.
 
Normally people start up the hyperbole once the more powerful hardware is in hand. But now they're starting before we even have a Durango or PS4. Which means the 360 and PS3 that everyone thinks are powerful are now weak as fuck. Major cognitive dissonance going on.

Personally, I'm well and truly over the PS3 and 360. I wouldn't use the term "weak as fuck" for any consoles on the market, but I do think they are tired old men that are holding back gaming progress.
 
I don't think it was their most successful game (I remember reading 300,000 units at some point).

It's over 300K in Japan. U.S. should be similar from the NPD 12-month rankings Nintendo puts out. Probably ~1m worldwide, then. Probably still not what they were hoping for in a new Sakurai game, but if it keeps him happy and on-board for Smash Bros., I doubt they mind.
 
Kid Icarus I think suffered more from the terrible state of handhelds in the US more than it being a new IP. I think they should try again on Wii U. Or maybe even port Kid Icarus to Wii U

Edit: Well if that article is true Nintendo failed without even being able to make a profit day 1.
 
I've only purchased the Z.O.E., GoW and ICO/SOTC collection but aside from Z.O.E. I've heard nasty issues about the SH collection and DMC collection and in general not a lot of positive reactions to HD cash-ins this gen.

That's really not the point though. A port is a port, being ported from 360 to WiiU (and given what we've learn today I don't understand how you can say they're in any way similar) is no different from a PS2 to PS3 port or a 360 to PC port. Any of those ports could end up buggy and unoptimized if resources aren't available to make them perfect.

I feel like I'm the only one who remembers "Xbox 1.5" from seven years ago :/

I remember those days clearly. Neogaf, doesnt though.
 
Just curious. I am by no means suggesting they start and end with Kid Icarus. Its the first thing that comes to mind. It has a huge amount of content, and obviously got the full marketing push, cartoons, stands in Best Buy, demos, etc.

If it didn't live up to expectations, that's a bad omen for new IPs. After all, it was a respected developer of a multi-million dollar series coupled with a franchise that, while it has little broader cache, should've at least garnered attention from the gaming press that would ask for it every couple E3's.

I don't know what their expectations were, but it definitely did not sell to Nintendo's standards. But I think marketing this type of game was always going to be tough for Nintendo, it was a bit abstract (shooting segments and action segments; a art style that doesn't necessarily have universal appeal; and a very uncomfortable control scheme for some people). Still, just because you have one failure does not mean you can't have another success. Sony has had tons of failures, but occasionally they break through the ice. I'm obviously not suggesting Nintendo replicate Sony's poor business decisions, but I am suggesting they be a little more open to the creation of stuff that contains not a single Nintendo character older than the latest generation...

I agree 100% with you Re: expansion. I'm a huge proponent of aggressive expansion (whether internal or consuming studios like MonolithSoft or Next Level or Monster). I see no reason why Nintendo shouldn't be releasing one retail title a month for both of their platforms, even if that includes smaller C-tier titles like Mario Tennis. That's a milestone they should've been striving to reach since they saw the writing on the wall with the latter days of N64.

Yeah. Even still, I would be happy if they could at least push two genuinely new hardcore IPs per year with big marketing budgets. It would signal to me a real desire to change and overcome a clear weakness in their consoles potential library.

I mean I am anticipating Pikmin 3 as much as anyone on Earth, but it wasn't too long ago that Pikmin was one of their bold and amazing new IPs that was genuinely fresh and original. Chibi Robo also, still holds up very well.

So it's possible to add to the stable if they try. I just think Kid Icarus was a bad choice to start with.

donny2112 said:
It's over 300K in Japan. U.S. should be similar from the NPD 12-month rankings Nintendo puts out. Probably ~1m worldwide, then. Probably still not what they were hoping for in a new Sakurai game, but if it keeps him happy and on-board for Smash Bros., I doubt they mind.

Thanks for the clarity. I hardly follow sales topics so I only vaguely remember seeing stuff about Kid Icarus sales.

Still if it's 1million worldwide, it's not too big a bomb probably. That's enough to make a profit, don't you think?
 
Well they have been expanding, but Nintendo is fucking crazy conservative company (which has kept them alive through the rough times) so if they expand too rapidly and they have a down period they will incur even more costs. I've said before though Nintendo is going to have to expand a lot more if they want to survive. Mario will not save them forever. They should be first in line to buy some of those THQ IPs and development studios.

What? LOL, hell to the no.


I'm not saying I disagree with Nintendo making acqusitions, but THQ? Really? Come on.

Iwata said it best when talking about acquisitions. There is no point in acquiring a company if all of the development talent leaves after they're purchased. All you have left is IP and some office buildings. THQ's culture and Nintendo's culture are like ketchup and coffee.

Now Nintendo purchasing some other companies who have worked with Nintendo extensively and are fairly familiar with their dev culture such as:

Next Level Games
Shin'en
Wayforward
Possibly Sega


Sounds like a much better bet and a much better fit. Outside of those companies I mentioned (sans Sega) I can't really think of any other studio that really gets or understands Nintendo's design philosophy like these ones.
 
How did Kid Icarus do? That had a pretty big marketing push and was squarely targeted at the hardcore.



Normally people start up the hyperbole once the more powerful hardware is in hand. But now they're starting before we even have a Durango or PS4. Which means the 360 and PS3 that everyone thinks are powerful are now weak as fuck. Major cognitive dissonance going on.

The 360 and ps3, now 7 and 6 years old respectively are indeed weak as fuck. Hence all the sub hd jabs on these forums.
 
Right, but sales is not what I am talking about. I am talking about Sony's desire to continually invest in daring original hardcore IPs, even if there is risk involved and even if it ultimately fails. This is a trait Nintendo genuinely could learn from, and if Nintendo did it we would surely be far better off... they have more talent than Sony when it comes to this sort of thing.

When many of the games you invest in turn out to be crap, or you run your franchises into the ground within the same generation, the only option left is to try something else. That's not exactly daring. Considering how many different shooter games they have put out this gen, meanwhile completely dropped the ball on something actually good and unique like Demons Souls, they can be pretty risk adverse as well.

It's not like they have ever stopped making the franchises that remained popular, they've managed to pump out those in quick succession across consoles and handhelds.

Nintendo looks pretty bad by comparison when most of their new IP money last gen went to shitty minigame fests. At least they are funding Platinum Games IPs now.
 
Still if it's 1million worldwide, it's not too big a bomb probably. That's enough to make a profit, don't you think?

Probably, but remember the game was in development for like 2 and half years and the marketing camapaign was huge. I'm sure they made some profit, but the overall project probably didn't do nearly as well as they were hoping. They were probably hoping for another staple ip
 
Yeah. Even still, I would be happy if they could at least push two genuinely new hardcore IPs per year with big marketing budgets. It would signal to me a real desire to change and overcome a clear weakness in their consoles potential library.

I mean I am anticipating Pikmin 3 as much as anyone on Earth, but it wasn't too long ago that Pikmin was one of their bold and amazing new IPs that was genuinely fresh and original. Chibi Robo also, still holds up very well.

I whole heartedly agree with you in wishing Nintendo would put more resources into new "core" IP. However, I think the actual strategy is going to be a second-party style system where they publish other studios core games. Example: The Wonderful 101 and Bayonetta 2 from Platnium.
 
Normally people start up the hyperbole once the more powerful hardware is in hand. But now they're starting before we even have a Durango or PS4. Which means the 360 and PS3 that everyone thinks are powerful are now weak as fuck. Major cognitive dissonance going on.

The console is as strong as 7 year old consoles, and that's the major problem. Now I understand that this strategy worked well on Nintendo's handhelds (on their hardware vs PSP's) but I can't help but to feel worried about it.

Nintendo MIGHT be going for a shorter life span for the consoles though, and we could see Wii U 2 in 3, 4 years.
 
things I learned from this thread

* The HD twins have a third wheel, group name to be determined

A) HD Triplets
B) The Three Amigos
C) Two down, One to go

* Wii U got hacked and all we got was a CPew, benefits to be determined

A) Region Free JRPGs
B) Homebrew Gamepad Streaming
C) Weekly Firmware Updates

* Could have been worst, in 6 months no one will care

A) Games
B) Games
C) All about the Games
 
When many of the games you invest in turn out to be crap, or you run your franchises into the ground within the same generation, the only option left is to try something else. That's not exactly daring. Considering how many different shooter games they have put out this gen, meanwhile completely dropped the ball on something actually good and unique like Demons Souls, they can be pretty risk adverse as well.

I think that's really wildly unfair to Sony. They have consistently all gen been trying new stuff. Yes, some of it fails. No question. But I'd rather a lot of bold failures than a lot of average successes, especially since once in a while they hit it out of the park.

To try to imply 'well it shouldn't count because they are probably forced to do this' is kind of silly.

Who knows where Demon Souls would have ended up without Sony, no matter what they ultimately decided on the franchise. All I know is that I much rather a company that does both - a company that brings out their stable of classic franchises while simultaneously investing in large market hardcore titles. And Sony has at least tried to do both all generation, and they've done it very well in past gens.

If Nintendo, who is way more talented on average than Sony adopted such an approach, I am sure the end result would be even more positive for gamers.

It's not like they have ever stopped making the franchises that remained popular, they've managed to pump out those in quick succession across consoles and handhelds.

Nintendo looks pretty bad by comparison when most of their new IP money last gen went to shitty minigame fests. At least they are funding Platinum Games IPs now.

Right, I'm not asking Nintendo to stop bringing out their franchises which sell well. I'm just asking that they approach development with the idea of ALSO creating bold new hardcore IPs with big marketing budgets.

That said, I am extremely happy they are getting Bayonetta 2. I hope they continue to aim at franchises like that and salvage them for another generation. There are quite a few I'd like to see given another shot. Maybe they can get Darksiders and actually turn the third game into a GOOD Zelda title ;)

Probably, but remember the game was in development for like 2 and half years and the marketing camapaign was huge.

That is true. I guess we'll never know how much it made, but I guess it definitely wasn't enough to try to develop KI into a new franchise again...

BD1 said:
I whole heartedly agree with you in wishing Nintendo would put more resources into new "core" IP. However, I think the actual strategy is going to be a second-party style system where they publish other studios core games. Example: The Wonderful 101 and Bayonetta 2 from Platnium.

As long as they do this consistently, though, I guess this would be a good compromise position. But they need more than Platinum games, so I hope they continue to push things like Wonderful and Xenoblade.
 
Um, The PS3 is significantly more powerful than a PS2. It shouldn't have the slighest trouble running games that look and run significantly better than PS2 games and does every time a new game is released for it.

So why does it have issues with some PS2 HD ports? It has nothing to do with running the games in higher res and everything to do with having a game directly ported to it from a different architecture. If the games were rebuilt from the ground up, which is probably close to what happened to some of the better collections like ICO/SOTC, then the PS3 wouldn't have had the slightest issue running the games.

That's why it's very silly to make the assumption that the WiiU struggling with current gen ports have anything to do with its hardware. It could very well be an underpowered PoS but use games built for it from the ground up to judge that.

Basically.

I'm disappointed in myself that I didnt come up with that example earlier. Its a real killer in getting that point through peoples heads.
 
Oh and I seriously doubt we've seen the last of Kid Icarus. I'm sure Nintendo knows why it didnt do as well as it should have.

Regardless, The game is still selling as evidenced by Nintendos monthly sales charts, probably little but its still on those charts. So we'll see what happens.
 
I feel like I'm the only one who remembers "Xbox 1.5" from seven years ago :/

I remember those days well.... but that situation was nothing like this.

I'm not saying the Wii U isn't a next gen console, or making claims about what it can/can't run, or about its overall power.

The "Xbox 1.5" scenario was pretty much people believing the PS3 would be much more powerful because of the things Sony were saying. It didn't come to pass.

I don't really see how that applies to the Wii U though.
 
Right, but sales is not what I am talking about. I am talking about Sony's desire to continually invest in daring original hardcore IPs, even if there is risk involved and even if it ultimately fails. This is a trait Nintendo genuinely could learn from, and if Nintendo did it we would surely be far better off... they have more talent than Sony when it comes to this sort of thing.

As a gamer, that's all I care about. I cannot play sales and sales do not turn me on.

totally agree. nintendo has created some of the best games along the years and i love them for it, but i've been more interested in recent sony output because they take so many risks with IPs. i don't care if it's gonna sell or not, i want new franchises along with a few good established ones.
i'm hoping for an uncharted 4 to see drake's new adventures in super duper ps4 graphics and i want to see a real life gran turismo, but above all, i wanna see what santa monica, sucker punch, sce japan, guerrilla games (please let that rpg rumor be true) and media molecule are gonna come up with.
sony has always taken risks with their games across all platforms and i love them for it.
 
It's also worth pointing out that Marcan, the guy who reveled these clock speeds, has stated the Wii U's CPU cannot be compared to the Xenon and Cell Processors. He's also said the Wii U's CPU should be able to process more instructions per cycle then them both. Reading his tweets the negative he pointed out about the Wii U's CPU was its inferior SMID capabilities vs Xenon and Cell, something we all knew.

I find it quite humerous reading all the posts in this thread from the technologically ingorant who are judging the system's capabilities on raw clock rates. Yet we have someone like Marcan who absolutely knows his shit, and has a solid rep, stating this CPU should exceed the capabilities of Xenon and Cell in many areas. And the one weak point he mentions SMID, likely can be off loaded to the GPU.

Also regarding SMID to quote from Wikipedia's article on it:

SIMD instructions are widely used to process 3D graphics, although modern graphics cards with embedded SIMD have largely taken over this task from the CPU

So the CPU situation does not sound 'weak as fuck' to me. Sounds like realistically the CPU is more then capable then the Xenon and Cell in many areas, and weak points like SMID can be off loaded to the ATi GPU.
 
I remember those days well.... but that situation was nothing like this.

I'm not saying the Wii U isn't a next gen console, or making claims about what it can/can't run, or about its overall power.

The "Xbox 1.5" scenario was pretty much people believing the PS3 would be much more powerful because of the things Sony were saying. It didn't come to pass.

I don't really see how that applies to the Wii U though.
It was a little bit more than that. There were several really lazy PS2 era ports that are largely forgotten now and were pretty irrelevant in the grand scheme of things because there were games at launch like Kameo and PGR2 that demonstrated the potential of the system.

This is the same reason why no one blames the PS3 hardware for shitty PS2 ports or PCs for shitty console ports; people have seen those systems do much better.

I really don't feel sorry for Nintendo getting all the flack that they're getting at launch because they made the decision not to show anything from their first parties that would demonstrate the graphical pontential of their system. I'm still not foolish enough to assume that the system is not capable of running current gen games due to launch ports however.
 
Top Bottom