Support NeoGAF

[Shadow of the BEAST]

I'm not sure what all you want out of this... I truly don't. I'm giving you links, I'm giving you facts, I'm giving you comparisons historically and I still think what you're getting at is something from the start I'm not disagreeing with.

I never once said a game was bad. I never once said a game system (ANY system) was bad. I never once threw an insult (aside from a bit of snark, which if you took offense to I'm sorry).

The fact remains, no console manufacturer started using top of the line, wattage gobbling hardware in systems till the PS360... Nintendo, Sega, Sony, Atari, NEC, etc ALL used older, mature tech that was both cheap and energy efficient. Not energy efficient because they wanted to save the world, but because it made for smaller, sleaker systems that required far less cooling.

Nintendo has never strayed from this approach. Not once, none of their consoles or handhelds have ever been powerful energy guzzling super consoles of their generations like the PS360 were. Nintendo didn't change their strategy and to some people that has been a detriment, but it was Sony and Microsoft who changed 3 decades worth of rules to push the HD gen in 2005/06.

(edit) BocoDragon: That's also a very good take on the situation. Consumer price expectancy is also a big part of all of this and something that played a big part is Sony doing so poorly in initial sales with the PS3 compared to PS1/2.

the thing is. You lack simple historic knowledge and perspective.

and you are wrong. Flat out wrong.

you look at certain wiki link and see xxx hardware started architectural development at 197x. Thus it must be outdated.

that is wrong. Pc back in 1990 did not have a sound card, did not have 256 color graphics.

this is how monkey island looked

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xRHPXRSkQc

and this how monkey island sounded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IOL4q5tDDQ

compare this smw???

outdated x8600 vs pc


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cETl8PhUy_E

 

[Eideka]

Shadow of the BEAST
Banned

Again.

Protip : learn some manners next time.

 

[Projectjustice]

You also got lots of people disagreeing with you.

Anyway, I gave you the chance and proceed to explain my point of view, yet this is the answer i get, an answer full of spite and brings nothing to the topic.

So guess my call was on the money when i said there's no point in trying to stablish some reasonable disscussion, your mind is made up. You engage in a disscusion to satisfy your ego not to reach the thruth or learn something. Just do what makes you feel better i guess.

You were cut off from the moment of your first post.

I already had a good few discussions with other rational posters. Thanks anyways.

 

[Refreshment.01]

Again.

Protip : learn some manners next time.

Is too bad really because he brings some interesting stuff to the table but he gets carried away some times. Yet, is hard to control our tempers, hopefully is not a perma.

 

[Projectjustice]

Again.

Protip : learn some manners next time.

Hes right though, wrong approach.

 

[Eideka]

Is too bad really because he brings some interesting stuff to the table but he gets carried away some times. Yet, is hard to control our tempers, hopefully is not a perma.

I don't think he has contributed to the discussion in any meaningful way, we knew everything he mentionned already.

Good riddance.

 

[KojiKnight]

Again.

Unfortunate...

Shadow of the Beast: You have to remember too that back in 1990 there were no standardization in hardware... PC COULD have actual sound cards in 1990, they COULD have VGA graphics (VGA was established as a standard in 1987) but the problem is that at the time there were no standardized API and you often had to design your games around the least common denominator if you wanted your PC game to sell.

At the time everyone was running dos, and drivers for video/audio had to be kept on the disc with the game and you had to manually select it.

That doesn't mean the hardware was weaker... it meant developers had no easy way to take advantage of it and still guarantee their games would work with most of the hardware out there.

It's also still contrary to the point that i was trying to make...

 

[Orayn]

I'd say the original xbox was the first.

Closer, at least. The CPU was essentially a Celeron, but the GPU compared favorably to the GeForce 3 and having a built-in hard drive set a higher standard for future systems.

 

[8bitForLife]

That bodes really badly for Nintendo then. As much as think that they could really benefit from the Kickstarter/Crowdsourcing model as the smallest company of the big three I don't believe that they will ever embrace a system where consumers have that much power and control over their development.

Many of the bridges they've burned with 3rd parties over the years has been due to their fierce protection of control over their IPs.

Isn't nintendo going out of their way to contact indies at lest that's what i heard and the indie dev have the ability to place their own prices on games and that the updates are free. If this is all true Nintendo fully realizes what cheap small games are now it might be a high ouya in a way. I could be wrong.

 

[KageMaru]

I'd say the original xbox was the first.

I'd actually say the DC was the first. The system was released in 1998, same year the SH-4 chip was released while also being the first system equipped with the PVR2 chip. Just so happens right after the DC launched, we saw huge leaps in 3D rendering (starting with T&L).

 

[MutFox]

Unfortunate...

Shadow of the Beast: You have to remember too that back in 1990 there were no standardization in hardware... PC COULD have actual sound cards in 1990, they COULD have VGA graphics (VGA was established as a standard in 1987) but the problem is that at the time there were no standardized API and you often had to design your games around the least common denominator if you wanted your PC game to sell.

At the time everyone was running dos, and drivers for video/audio had to be kept on the disc with the game and you had to manually select it.

That doesn't mean the hardware was weaker... it meant developers had no easy way to take advantage of it and still guarantee their games would work with most of the hardware out there.

It's also still contrary to the point that i was trying to make...

This is very true for PC back in the day...
Also true that many developers programmed for the lowest common denominator,
so lots of hardware wasn't taken advantage of.

 

[KojiKnight]

I'd actually say the DC was the first. The system was released in 1998, same year the SH-4 chip was released while also being the first system equipped with the PVR2 chip. Just so happens right after the DC launched, we saw huge leaps in 3D rendering (starting with T&L).

While the SH-4 was brand new tech, it was also a chip designed for PDAs and other lower power/wattage devices. The first x-box definitely pushed more for fast hardware. Sadly I don't have the power draw numbers of the x-box to place it anywhere in my argument one way or the other.

(Edit) Or maybe I'm wrong? I was thinking SH-4 were used in some PDAs as a competitor to ARM... but I can't find anything to back that up so likely pulled that one from my ass <_<

(edit 2) Woot! Semi-right http://www.epinions.com/specs/cmhd-PDAs-All-Compaq_Aero_8000?sb=1

They were processors used in super portable laptops of the time while running a PDA operating system (Windows CE)

 

[FStop7]

Pretty much.

Once again pretty much all assets nowadays are made at a far higher quality than what we're seeing.

For example software such as Zbrush allow for insanely high poly modeling to be created with such ease.

I do think we've pretty much reached the apex of budgets.

For character models, perhaps. But that doesn't account for environments. If environment detail increases as well, you still need level designers to create them.

IIRC Zbrush is already used for environmental work as well.

For building entire environments? Or just set pieces?

UE3 still uses the Unreal Editor to create the environments, but you can import meshes created in Zbrush for finish elements. If you can use Zbrush to create larger elements, great. UDK runs like poo on my PC, so I haven't taken the time to relearn how to use UnrealEd.

I follow the ZBrush community (zbrushcentral) pretty closely and I've not seen it used for creating environments. It's not really meant for that. Set pieces, yes. But not not entire rooms or maps or anything.

Here's the closest I've seen to it being used for environments, where it was used for creating cave features in Halo 4.

http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?67348-Some-Zbrush-and-Max-Work&p=985984#post985984

 

[FyreWulff]

Pretty much.

Their portables were always "underpowered" compared to direct competition (GB v Lynx, for instance), but I would argue that they were simply more efficient.

I think the word I'd use is "stable".

Here's another thing though.. even though the GameCube was a solid piece of tech, a lot of people still had the perception that it was weaker than the PS2. They were also now competing against a company that was willing to throw away money by the truckload (Microsoft) just to get into the console game.

If people have the perception that your hardware was not as powerful as it actually was, if your competitor has more money than god and is willing to spend anything to stay in, and if you spent the last two generations going for the power angle but still ending up in last place while your competitor had the weakest hardware and beat you, going a third time with the same plan isn't going to get you anywhere. Especially when your handhelds have been doing just fine with the same plan, and Sony couldn't spend it's way into handheld parity or dominance.

They were always going to be underpowered compared against the supercorps upcoming consoles due to a) only being a game and toy company and b) coming out first. It would have mattered if the Wii U had 6 cores and 5 gigs of RAM, people would be just saying "Well, Orbis is going to have 10GB of RAM, so lol Nintendo". They seemed to admit this fact before some of their fans could and carried out their plan as such. Let the money juggernauts spend a bunch of time punching each other and attempt to build up friendly relations with the third parties in terms of updates and development costs. Build a cadre of buddy developers instead of collecting trophies.

 

[Dreamwriter]

This is very true for PC back in the day...
Also true that many developers programmed for the lowest common denominator,
so lots of hardware wasn't taken advantage of.

Yeah, but when you ran into one of the few games that supported your Gravis Ultrasound...it was heaven!

And BTW, Secret of Monkey Island DID support better PC hardware. Here's the same exact game that was linked to, but this time in VGA with CD music (another optional PC hardware upgrade), still 1990:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMp2p-0s-IU

 

[Refreshment.01]

I think the word I'd use is "stable".

Here's another thing though.. even though the GameCube was a solid piece of tech, a lot of people still had the perception that it was weaker than the PS2. They were also now competing against a company that was willing to throw away money by the truckload (Microsoft) just to get into the console game.

If people have the perception that your hardware was not as powerful as it actually was, if your competitor has more money than god and is willing to spend anything to stay in, and if you spent the last two generations going for the power angle but still ending up in last place while your competitor had the weakest hardware and beat you, going a third time with the same plan isn't going to get you anywhere. Especially when your handhelds have been doing just fine with the same plan, and Sony couldn't spend it's way into handheld parity or dominance.

They were always going to be underpowered compared against the supercorps upcoming consoles due to a) only being a game and toy company and b) coming out first. It would have mattered if the Wii U had 6 cores and 5 gigs of RAM, people would be just saying "Well, Orbis is going to have 10GB of RAM, so lol Nintendo". They seemed to admit this fact before some of their fans could and carried out their plan as such. Let the money juggernauts spend a bunch of time punching each other and attempt to build up friendly relations with the third parties in terms of updates and development costs. Build a cadre of buddy developers instead of collecting trophies.

It's not hard to understand. Most sane people don't expect Nintendo to match the competition specs, however after 7 years of this long ass generation, a substantial leap was in order.

I don't mind the WiiU being underpowered, the problem is that the machine is priced out of mass market and the concept is not as compeliling as the Wii Remote was. And funny enough, the dual screen idea fits well with a console fitted with significant power under the hood.

 

[Saint Gregory]

How do you mean?

There have been several behind the scenes accounts ranging back to the Sony/SNES add-on and as recently as the EA/Origin/WiiU rumors where Nintendo attempted to partner with a 3rd party but then talks broke down (or Nintendo just straight up pulled out) because the 3rd party wanted special access or licensing of Nintendo IPs.

You certainly can't blame the 3rd parties for trying but Nintendo seems dead set on not sharing their IPs with anyone. Maybe those CD-i Zeldas burned them more than we realized.

Isn't nintendo going out of their way to contact indies at lest that's what i heard and the indie dev have the ability to place their own prices on games and that the updates are free. If this is all true Nintendo fully realizes what cheap small games are now it might be a high ouya in a way. I could be wrong.

We've heard a lot about Nintendo trying harder to make better relationships with big and small devs, but getting rid of those crazy e-Shop policies where devs don't get paid until their games reach a certain sales threshold is a good place to start which I believe they have.

 

[KageMaru]

While the SH-4 was brand new tech, it was also a chip designed for PDAs and other lower power/wattage devices. The first x-box definitely pushed more for fast hardware. Sadly I don't have the power draw numbers of the x-box to place it anywhere in my argument one way or the other.

(Edit) Or maybe I'm wrong? I was thinking SH-4 were used in some PDAs as a competitor to ARM... but I can't find anything to back that up so likely pulled that one from my ass <_<

(edit 2) Woot! Semi-right http://www.epinions.com/specs/cmhd-PDAs-All-Compaq_Aero_8000?sb=1

They were processors used in super portable laptops of the time while running a PDA operating system (Windows CE)

Oh sorry, I thought we were talking about how new/old the chips were compared to the system's launch, not whether or not they were high powered components. Nevermind on my comment.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

It's not hard to understand. Most sane people don't expect Nintendo to match the competition specs, however after 7 years of this long ass generation, a substantial leap was in order.

I don't mind the WiiU being underpowered, the problem is that the machine is priced out of mass market and the concept is not as compeliling as the Wii Remote was. And funny enough, the dual screen idea fits well with a console fitted with significant power under the hood.

Priced out of the mass market?

Aside from Wii that is the cheapest dual pricing scheme we've seen from a console manufacturer last gen and this new gen.

Concept I'll give you. Upad is not the hook of the Wiimote, but price is just crazy talk man. WiiU will be the cheapest of the three platforms. I don't see either MS or Sony hitting $599 ever again, but I also don't see them hitting $299 either.

 

[FyreWulff]

Eh.. as a developer, I only see more cores and more RAM coming at this point. Even if you have a 360 project, you now have twice the RAM to play with and a guaranteed flash drive to work with now, and 25GB disc to store your assets on instead of 8 gigs.. that's a pretty solid jump for now. If I really wanted to be bold, I'd say the 360 DVD was holding this generation down more than it's processor. Even if the PS3 had a slower-than-DVD read speed, it still could potentially hold more plentiful/varied assets.

Ain't nothing to be worried about really. Only the big dogs are going to be using all the available power of Orbis/720. But that hardware will be fun to play with too.

 

[Saint Gregory]

Eh.. as a developer, I only see more cores and more RAM coming at this point. Even if you have a 360 project, you now have twice the RAM to play with and a guaranteed flash drive to work with now, and 25GB disc to store your assets on instead of 8 gigs.. that's a pretty solid jump for now. If I really wanted to be bold, I'd say the 360 DVD was holding this generation down more than it's processor. Even if the PS3 had a slower-than-DVD read speed, it still could potentially hold more plentiful/varied assets.

Ain't nothing to be worried about really. Only the big dogs are going to be using all the available power of Orbis/720. But that hardware will be fun to play with too.

It's nice to hear a developers perspective but if this is true it's going to make a lot of GAF posters very sad.

 

[test_account]

and this how monkey island sounded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IOL4q5tDDQ

Amazing to do the Monkey Island theme with just one sound channel

There have been several behind the scenes accounts ranging back to the Sony/SNES add-on and as recently as the EA/Origin/WiiU rumors where Nintendo attempted to partner with a 3rd party but then talks broke down (or Nintendo just straight up pulled out) because the 3rd party wanted special access or licensing of Nintendo IPs.

You certainly can't blame the 3rd parties for trying but Nintendo seems dead set on not sharing their IPs with anyone. Maybe those CD-i Zeldas burned them more than we realized.

I see. But will this really affect 3rd party game support though? I dont see this being the case with Microsoft and Sony, and i rarely see Micrsoft and Sony IPs being used in 3rd party games.

 

[Saint Gregory]

I see. But will this really affect 3rd party game support though? I dont see this being the case with Microsoft and Sony, and i rarely see Micrsoft and Sony IPs being used in 3rd party games.

It may already be. There's no real way to know if the Origin/WiiU rumors are true unless one side or the other comments on it (which will probably never happen) but something strange has happened to Nintendo and EA's relationship over the last year. EA was introduced as a major partner for the WiiU launch at E3'11 and now EA's attitude towards the WiiU seems to be less than stellar bordering on disinterest.

Hopefully those issues will work themselves out in the near future because Nintendo is really going to need EA's support if the WiiU is going to be successful.

 

[Refreshment.01]

Priced out of the mass market?

Aside from Wii that is the cheapest dual pricing scheme we've seen from a console manufacturer last gen and this new gen.

Concept I'll give you. Upad is not the hook of the Wiimote, but price is just crazy talk man. WiiU will be the cheapest of the three platforms. I don't see either MS or Sony hitting $599 ever again, but I also don't see them hitting $299 either.

They are the only new gen console

They are the most expensive proposition right now and the software looks comaprable to competitors, the applications of the Upad haven't florished enough yet to make a massive difference. And lets not forget MS did offer their cutting edge hardware in 2005 for 300. ANd the 399 pro pack gave you a console feature packed, even with an HD, something that even Nintendo lacks.

If 399 would've let them include something more competent hardware wise, they should have gone for it by all means. In the long run it would have been hughly beneficial.

 

[AzaK]

It's not hard to understand. Most sane people don't expect Nintendo to match the competition specs, however after 7 years of this long ass generation, a substantial leap was in order.

I don't mind the WiiU being underpowered, the problem is that the machine is priced out of mass market and the concept is not as compeliling as the Wii Remote was. And funny enough, the dual screen idea fits well with a console fitted with significant power under the hood.

Quick question. Do you have one? I got mine yesterday and I can already see how appealing the GamePad and games could be.

Now for the "tech driven gamer" then yes it will be disappointing as we'll get another generation of games just a bit better than what we have in the top tier today (After a while) but I can fully see the Wii U doing well.

For me, the ONLY concern I have is if it will be the ports from current and next gen SONY/MS titles. Unfortunately the more I hear about it and when I read release lists for 2013 it is NOT looking good. Hopefullly when the other devs move into next gen that will change, but will the damage be done by then?.

If Wii U loses (Doesn't get) the western support then it will essentially mean that next year I'll get a new MS console and the Wii U will sit there gathering dust until the odd Nintendo game comes along that I like. read: Zelda, 3d Mario and Metroid. This means less money for Nintendo. If this translates into a general trend amongst enthusiast gamers then it will mean Nintendo will undoubtedly end up with a much smaller market than Wii.


As was proven with the Wii, Nintendo really needs the core gamers to help sustain their sales throughout the lifetime of the system and not to see a massive drop off towards the end once the hype of the new thing has died down. IMO They REALLY, REALLY, REALLY needed to make sure they could provide a system that was going to be able to cater to the Western titles i.e. had the grunt. Time will tell of course because it's a combo of machine power and publisher willingness, so maybe it will pan out but I'm losing confidence.

 

[Delusibeta]

The problem is that a good 99% of the positive comments I've heard about the Wii U I heard and indeed said myself around the Wii's launch, and we all know how that ended up. I'm not convinced that history won't repeat. Sure, it's another dose of Nintendo Innovation, but that won't count for much in three years time if there's no third party support, and I say that as a bitter Vita owner.

 

[StayDead]

The problem is that a good 99% of the positive comments I've heard about the Wii U I heard and indeed said myself around the Wii's launch, and we all know how that ended up. I'm not convinced that history won't repeat. Sure, it's another dose of Nintendo Innovation, but that won't count for much in three years time if there's no third party support, and I say that as a bitter Vita owner.

Delusi the main difference is when you look at every Nintendo console after the N64 third party support outside of Japan has been almost non-existant other than really bad ports or party games. The vita on the other hand doesn't have a strong first party output to keep it alive. Sony consoles have always required the use of third parties to keep them alive, their first party output just isn't on the same level of sales as Nintendo's.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

They are the only new gen console

They are the most expensive proposition right now and the software looks comaprable to competitors, the applications of the Upad haven't florished enough yet to make a massive difference. And lets not forget MS did offer their cutting edge hardware in 2005 for 300. ANd the 399 pro pack gave you a console feature packed, even with an HD, something that even Nintendo lacks.

If 399 would've let them include something more competent hardware wise, they should have gone for it by all means. In the long run it would have been hughly beneficial.

How does any of that mean they've priced themselves out of the market?

 

[The Abominable Snowman]

The problem is that a good 99% of the positive comments I've heard about the Wii U I heard and indeed said myself around the Wii's launch, and we all know how that ended up. I'm not convinced that history won't repeat. Sure, it's another dose of Nintendo Innovation, but that won't count for much in three years time if there's no third party support, and I say that as a bitter Vita owner.

As a new Vita and Wii U owner, at the same time, don't focus so much on the future of these consoles as much as the current. The Wii U plays Wii games, can play the new Mario and Assassins Creed/CoD in bed, is easily hackable (Though yeah this would fall in the future column), and has free online gaming, however sparse. The Vita has the best version of every single FF game from 1 to 9 plus side games, and an amazing PSP library bolstered by pretty neat Vita functions that would easily go for $150-200 by itself in a tablet.

Who cares about the future?

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

Quick question. Do you have one? I got mine yesterday and I can already see how appealing the GamePad and games could be.

Now for the "tech driven gamer" then yes it will be disappointing as we'll get another generation of games just a bit better than what we have in the top tier today (After a while) but I can fully see the Wii U doing well.

I remember being impressed with the Wiimote for the first few weeks after I got a Wii but in the end I felt that the traditional controller offered by Sony and Microsoft was superior. Still love the Gamecube controller too.


It isn't about the tech as much as it's about justifying the price of buying a new console and a library of games for it. Why should anyone pay $350 minimum to get a console that technically is on par with they already have and have had for possibly 6 years.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

I remember being impressed with the Wiimote for the first few weeks after I got a Wii but in the end I felt that the traditional controller offered by Sony and Microsoft was superior. Still love the Gamecube controller too.


It isn't about the tech as much as it's about justifying the price of buying a new console and a library of games for it. Why should anyone pay $350 minimum to get a console that technically is on par with they already have and have had for possibly 6 years.

The same reason they'd buy a 3DS which is technically on par with a PSP.

Games.

 

[Tookay]

It isn't about the tech as much as it's about justifying the price of buying a new console and a library of games for it. Why should anyone pay $350 minimum to get a console that technically is on par with they already have and have had for possibly 6 years.

I don't buy consoles solely for the sake of their tech.

It's the convergence of tech, games, lineup, and price. You can't just isolate one factor and make it determinative.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

The same reason they'd buy a 3DS which is technically on par with a PSP.

Games.

What games are worth $350 on the WiiU? Another 2D Mario game?

I don't buy consoles solely for the sake of their tech.

It's the convergence of tech, games, lineup, and price. You can't just isolate one factor and make it determinative.

I didn't.

 

[Tookay]

What games are worth $350 on the WiiU? Another 2D Mario game?

You're playing dumb. You buy consoles for their (presumed) future library, just as much as the ones currently on the shelf. You know exactly what you're buying a Nintendo system for and what games are eventually going to come with it.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

What games are worth $350 on the WiiU? Another 2D Mario game?

That depends on the person.

 

[Orayn]

What games are worth $350 on the WiiU? Another 2D Mario game?

Games being worth the console is a pretty (read: ENTIRELY) subjective thing. For me, it's Pikmin 3 and Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate in the short term. In the long term, the next Zelda, 3D Mario, whatever amazing thing Retro is working on, and Super Smash Bros.

 

[Dreamwriter]

What games are worth $350 on the WiiU? Another 2D Mario game?

The best Mario games are 2D...

 

[BlackJace]

What games are worth $350 on the WiiU? Another 2D Mario game?



I didn't.

What point are you trying to make? People buy the console games that they want to buy. Why is that so hard to grasp?

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

You're playing dumb. You buy consoles for their (presumed) future library, just as much as the ones currently on the shelf. You know exactly what you're buying a Nintendo system for and what games are eventually going to come with it.

I bet alot of people bought a $600 PS3 for the future games too. Of course, it was understandable coming off of the PS2 that people would think the PS3 would have amazing third party support. Coming off the Wii, how could anyone bet on a bright future for the WiiU? Wouldn't it be smarter to wait and see and also pay less for the WiiU in a year or two?

What happens if the NextBox and the PS4 greatly outclass the WiiU? Won't that put the WiiU in the same position as the Wii was?

The best Mario games are 2D...

Yes, the ones on the NES and SNES. You can play those without the WiiU.

 

[Tookay]

I bet alot of people bought a $600 PS3 for the future games too. Of course, it was understandable coming off of the PS2 that people would think the PS3 would have amazing third party support. Coming off the Wii, how could anyone bet on a bright future for the WiiU? Wouldn't it be smarter to wait and see and also pay less for the WiiU in a year or two?

What happens if the NextBox and the PS4 greatly outclass the WiiU? Won't that put the WiiU in the same position as the Wii was?

I'm well aware of the history of the Wii and third parties.

As I am of the history of Nintendo and third parties.

Yet I'm still buying their systems, which are still worth it for the Nintendo games. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I imagine that validates the $350 pricetag for many. It's not about just one game, nor is it just the launch games. And certainly not the third party support. But the future Nintendo games.

Like I said, you know exactly what you're getting with a Nintendo system.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

I bet alot of people bought a $600 PS3 for the future games too. Of course, it was understandable coming off of the PS2 that people would think the PS3 would have amazing third party support. Coming off the Wii, how could anyone bet on a bright future for the WiiU? Wouldn't it be smarter to wait and see and also pay less for the WiiU in a year or two?

What happens if the NextBox and the PS4 greatly outclass the WiiU? Won't that put the WiiU in the same position as the Wii was?

You're kind of all over the place with this.

You asked "What makes a WiiU worth $350 even though it's hardware is comparable to its current competitors?" I answered games. "You asked what games?" I answered depends on the person.

You're not going to get a 100% conclusive answer even switching out manufacturers. For some it will be the Gamepad, for others it will be Mario, to some it will be the increase in hardware power over Wii, to others it will be the OS.

To some it will be "I dunno... just wanted to buy it."

 

[CoconutTank]

What games are worth $350 on the WiiU? Another 2D Mario game?

Getting it for now for NSMBU, looking forward to Rayman Legends, Pikmin 3 and Wonderful 101! :3

Edit: Oh yeah been playing some Scribblenauts lately too :3

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

I'm well aware of the history of the Wii and third parties.

As I am of the history of Nintendo and third parties.

Yet I'm still buying their systems, which are still worth it for the Nintendo games. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I imagine that validates the $350 pricetag for many. It's not about just one game, nor is it just the launch games. And certainly not the third party support. But the future Nintendo games.

Yeah, that kind of dried up for me when the long awaited Zelda and Metroid games for the Wii turned out to be....mediocre at best. Sure, we are all looking forward to another 3D Mario but by the time it comes out the WiiU may be down $100 in price.

The weak CPU is disappointing. How far into the future will the WiiU be relevant to third parties?

 

[Xun]

I will eventually get the Wii U, but certainly not with the lack of games and current price point.

Not to say I don't think the system is a bit of a joke, but you know, Nintendo games.

 

[AstroNut325]

If this gen wasn't a wake up call then I'm really afraid for the industry.

So... The wake up call is developing games for Nintendo hardware that is in line with PS360 hardware that resulted in many studios crashing?

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Yeah, that kind of dried up for me when the long awaited Zelda and Metroid games for the Wii turned out to be....mediocre at best. Sure, we are all looking forward to another 3D Mario but by the time it comes out the WiiU may be down $100 in price.

The weak CPU is disappointing. How far into the future will the WiiU be relevant to third parties?

I'm pretty sure it isn't relevant to them now.

 

[Refreshment.01]

Quick question. Do you have one? I got mine yesterday and I can already see how appealing the GamePad and games could be.

Now for the "tech driven gamer" then yes it will be disappointing as we'll get another generation of games just a bit better than what we have in the top tier today (After a while) but I can fully see the Wii U doing well.

For me, the ONLY concern I have is if it will be the ports from current and next gen SONY/MS titles. Unfortunately the more I hear about it and when I read release lists for 2013 it is NOT looking good. Hopefullly when the other devs move into next gen that will change, but will the damage be done by then?.

If Wii U loses (Doesn't get) the western support then it will essentially mean that next year I'll get a new MS console and the Wii U will sit there gathering dust until the odd Nintendo game comes along that I like. read: Zelda, 3d Mario and Metroid. This means less money for Nintendo. If this translates into a general trend amongst enthusiast gamers then it will mean Nintendo will undoubtedly end up with a much smaller market than Wii.


As was proven with the Wii, Nintendo really needs the core gamers to help sustain their sales throughout the lifetime of the system and not to see a massive drop off towards the end once the hype of the new thing has died down. IMO They REALLY, REALLY, REALLY needed to make sure they could provide a system that was going to be able to cater to the Western titles i.e. had the grunt. Time will tell of course because it's a combo of machine power and publisher willingness, so maybe it will pan out but I'm losing confidence.

Pretty reasonable assertions in which we agree, you get what im saying. Now on to your question.

I had an extensive playtime with the device, the interaction with the tablet is not something i haven't seen before even from other NIntendo devices, so it's impact is lessen to me. The range of the Upad is not enough to make the device play anywhere in the house, which would have ended up being a very compeiling feature to me. And there's no leap in terms of fidelity.

Adding to this there's not a most have Nintendo game at launch or announced down the line. And the ports are better in the competing consoles. It's the most expensive device in the market right now and both the PS3/360 offer a lot more features (outside of the Upad) and better online structure, all this at a cheaper price. Let's not even get into game catalogues.

As you see, being a reasonable consumer i can't justify expending 350 in the device. Not at this stage in time at least.

How does any of that mean they've priced themselves out of the market?

What? Didn't you read my posts or the above one. They priced themselves out of mass market. To repeat myself, yet again, the competing devices are cheaper, so far offer a similar grade of fidelity, are more feature rich and have a superior game library.

The same reason they'd buy a 3DS which is technically on par with a PSP.

Games.

If it's about the games, why exactly anyone would pick up a Wii U as of now? What games are on the WiiU exactly, so far?

This doesn't really fortifies your argument Thunder

The best Mario games are 2D...

Really subjective. Some prefer 3D outings, but of course the 2D ones have proven to be the best sellers. But the 3D ones are the most critically acclaimed recently.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Pretty reasonable assertions in which we agree, you get what im saying. Now on to your question.

I had an extensive playtime with the device, the interaction with the tablet is not something i haven't seen before even from other NIntendo devices, so it's impact is lessen to me. The range of the Upad is not enough to make the device play anywhere in the house, which would have ended up being a very compeiling feature to me. And there's no leap in terms of fidelity.

Adding to this there's not a most have Nintendo game at launch or announced down the line. And the ports are better in the competing consoles. It's the most expensive device in the market right now and both the PS3/360 offer a lot more features (outside of the Upad) and better online structure, all this at a cheaper price. Let's not even get into game catalogues.

As you see, being a reasonable consumer i can't justify expending 350 in the device.

What? Didn't you read my posts or the above one. They priced themselves out of mass market. To repeat myself, yet again, the competing devices are cheaper, so far offer a similar grade of fidelity, are more feature rich and have a superior game library.

If it's about the games, why exactly anyone would pick up a Wii U as of now? What games are on the WiiU exactly, so far?

This doesn't really fortifies your argument Thunder

So the same situation the Wii was in versus the PS2 eh?

 

[Dreamwriter]

What happens if the NextBox and the PS4 greatly outclass the WiiU? Won't that put the WiiU in the same position as the Wii was?

No, because the the Wii had a huge flaw that rendered it incapable of running games made for 360 and PS3 without their engines being completely rewritten and many assets remade. That flaw isn't that the system wasn't powerful or didn't support HD, it was that the Wii didn't support programmable pixel/fragment shaders, which forms the core of graphic engines for any GPU that supports it. Also, the Wii's control system meant that games had to be partially redesigned for it. Had the Wii just added support for Pixel Shaders (like the original XBox did) and threw a Classic Controller in the box so developers could be 100% sure all customers would have one, the Wii may have seen more third-party ports.

The Wii U doesn't have a flaw like that - the "NextBox/PS4" aren't going to be using any futuristic graphics tech, they are going to be programmed the same way modern PC games are programmed...which is the same way a Wii U is programmed. And of course the Wii U's controller is on par with what's become standard these days, just with a big ole screen in the middle.

So no, if the Wii U ends up in the same third-party-support position as the Wii, it won't be because of its technical prowess compared to the competition.

 

[Colonel Mustard]

What games are worth $350 on the WiiU? Another 2D Mario game?

It's all relative to your tastes. Why buy anything for entertainment purposes?

For me it's because of the franchises. I like Nintendo games. I know Nintendo games are coming. Stuff like ZombiU being awesome and Rayman Legends, Monster Hunter Ultimate/Bayonetta 2 getting announced as exclusives is just icing when I decided to make my purchase.

I don't shit up Vita threads asking why someone would buy one when it has absolutely no future...why do this in a WiiU thread?