Support NeoGAF

[walking fiend]

Excellent post here folks

Also to add to his points in favor of Wii U; one must notice that although Nintendo could produce a console closer to PS4/720 at a lower cost the next year, but at the moment the price of the Wii U can get cheaper sooner (although I really doubt Nintendo dropping the price of Wii U anytime soon unless it bombs)

 

[bomma_man]

The Wii was the darling of the mainstream press for years, it was the in thing among the masses and a huge percentage of them never bought another game ... the Wii became a Wii Sports machine.

Software sales for most games (except Nintendo core and party / dance games) sold abysmally.

For such a vast install base the attach rates for games sold per console where dreadful.

The majority of Wii sales where to non gamers jumping on the bandwagon.

Also my post is not to be taken exactly in terms of figures etc, but in a rough sense what I stated I believe to be accurate.

edit: I stated it was too underpowered for me and that I don't like motion control.

No one bought any games or people only bought Nintendo and dance games, which is it? As far as I know the attach rate for the Wii is marginally below the PS3. As for games, and I know this is an argument that never goes anywhere, where was the high quality third party software? It can't sell if it doesn't exist. Anyway, I'm done, I need sleep.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

The Wii was the darling of the mainstream press for years, it was the in thing among the masses and a huge percentage of them never bought another game ... the Wii became a Wii Sports machine.

Software sales for most games (except Nintendo core and party / dance games) sold abysmally.

For such a vast install base the attach rates for games sold per console where dreadful.

The majority of Wii sales where to non gamers jumping on the bandwagon.

Also my post is not to be taken exactly in terms of figures etc, but in a rough sense what I stated I believe to be accurate.

edit: I stated it was too underpowered for me and that I don't like motion control.

Well you can play the 'truthiness' card all you want, but the last I checked Wii attach rates are about in line with the PS3s.

This is a crappy venn diagram of the market.

Without knowing what the numbers are for the ? areas, it is literally impossible to make any meaningful statement about userbases for each console and you're just pulling stuff out of your ass.

That middle ? - the one who owns all three consoles - is your actual 'core' gamer.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Unless it sells well, and becomes target platform for AAA multiplatforms like the PS2 did.

Just like the Wii did, wait what

Wii launched last and never had the userbase advantage over the cominbed HD consoles. By the time there was any clue how successful it was almost everyone who wasn't Nintendo had already shifted to developing games for those consoles several years prior. If Wii U were in the situation Wii was in, the new Xbox would've launched 7 months ago and Sony would be launching the successor to the biggest gaming hardware ever in 5 months. But those things not being the case, the industry as a whole isn't entrenched in any one next direction yet.

X360 and PS3 are at about 65 million each.

the PS2 was at about 150 million.

so thats about 20 million users you just discounted, assuming that the userbase of the 360 and the PS3 has been entirely stagnant between generations, and that almost nobody owns both a PS3 and a 360.

The point about there being people who own both PS3 and X360 is fair, but not the 150 million. The combined PS360 is above where PS2 was at ~6 years. What you say about people owning both is true, though, so it's hard to directly compare how many different people made up the PS2 vs HDTwin userbases.

 

[Jburton]

Well you can play the 'truthiness' card all you want, but the last I checked Wii attach rates are about in line with the PS3s.

This is a crappy venn diagram of the market.

Without knowing what the numbers are for the ? areas, it is literally impossible to make any meaningful statement about userbases for each console and you're just pulling stuff out of your ass.

That middle ? - the one who owns all three consoles - is your actual 'core' gamer.

What exactly am I pulling out of my ass?

We are having a debate, keep the insults to yourself.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

What exactly am I pulling out of my ass?

We are having a debate, keep the insults to yourself.

You said the PS2 userbase split out into owning the 360 and the PS3, and that the Wii didn't pick up many if any of that userbase except 'casuals'.

You said the majority of the Wii userbase is 'casuals'.

You're not using any evidence to justify those assertions.

You are pulling them out of your ass.

EDIT: That's not an insult, its a turn of phrase. Feel free to read it as "you're making shit up" instead.

 

[bomma_man]

What exactly am I pulling out of my ass?

We are having a debate, keep the insults to yourself.

Your assertions. You have no evidentiary basis for them.

 

[gamergirly]

So is this thread saying that the WiiU sucks?

Nope. Its just saying the same bullshit that was said about the Wii in 2006. Most of the intelligent posters have already replied and confirmed a likehood of Wii U being closer to PS4/Xbox720 than the current gen. This thread is now just circle jerking around either new/uninformed posters or general nintendo doom mongering in disguise.

 

[Jburton]

You said the PS2 userbase split out into owning the 360 and the PS3, and that the Wii didn't pick up many if any of that userbase except 'casuals'.

You said the majority of the Wii userbase is 'casuals'.

You're not using any evidence to justify those assertions.

You are pulling them out of your ass.

Where are you getting your information that proves the contrary?

I am stating my opinion and my own interpretation of how the market changed in terms of install base for the platform holders from one gen to the next.

Why are you getting so irate, attack the post and not me.

 

[Jburton]

Your assertions. You have no evidentiary basis for them.

I never said what I posted was anything more than just my assertions, my take on things .... I never stated that they where fact or ever pretended that they were.

 

[Durante]

Nope. Its just saying the same bullshit that was said about the Wii in 2006. Most of the intelligent posters have already replied and confirmed a likehood of Wii U being closer to PS4/Xbox720 than the current gen. This thread is now just circle jerking around either new/uninformed posters or general nintendo doom mongering in disguise.

Who would those "intelligent posters" be, and where are their posts? Because that, as stated by you, is very unlikely at this point.

 

[gofreak]

Nothing really points at a repeat of this generation. Even assuming the rumors were true, Wii U would have a 360GFLOPS GPU, compared to 1800GFLOPS for the next Playstation. Sounds like a huge difference, but five times as powerful isn't really that big of a deal. The differences in RAM should be even smaller and the featureset should be nearly identical. On the PC side, developers have to deal with much larger differences.

On the PC side, most devs are pivoting around a low-end in order to accommodate (or potentially accommodate) a console port in the future. So that's how they're dealing with the larger differences - scaling from a lower-end kernel.

The big big question for Wii-U is what pubs will do for next-generation games. Will they choose to pivot around Wii-U as a baseline, or choose Orbis/Durango as their base and treat Wii-U as its own thing, or as part of ongoing 'legacy' content development.

We won't be able to say for sure for another 12 months or so. That we cannot say for sure now is problematic for Nintendo given the lack of trust capital they have in this area.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

Where are you getting your information that proves the contrary?

I am stating my opinion and my own interpretation of how the market changed in terms of install base for the platform holders from one gen to the next.

Why are you getting so irate, attack the post and not me.

1) It is impossible to prove a negative. Logic 101.

2) I'm not getting irate or attacking you. You are making statements of facts that aren't true (Wii owners don't buy software, easily checked by looking at numerous topics about this) and general wishy-washy assertions about 'what you reckon' without any proof as to why that might be so.

You are 100% entitled to your own thoughts and opinions, but if they are demonstrably wrong I am 100% entitled to show that.

 

[IdeaMan]

I am not sure if it is good even for that; I mean, the radeon 4xxx can range from weak sauce so completely powerful.

Do you have any info on how powerful the final hardware is? for example in terms of what 4xxx it is equivalent to?

And also thanks for all the leaks. I think if it wasn't for your info, people expectations would have had been much more unrealistic.

You're welcomed

For the RV700, it's seems it's not the 1 teraflop "promised" by an AMD employee some times ago (so the higher-end of this chips family, like the RV790 or RV770). But it won't be the RV710 either. Of course, you have to add the word "comparable" before every sentence here, what we'll get in the retail unit, that developers certainly play with on the mass production dev kits they owned since a few weeks, isn't an off-the-shelf RV700, it's customized beyond recognition, and we had a lot of good folks in the speculation thread explaining what they could have added/modified/removed on those chips. But the target specs are valid at least for the minimum expectable performances, it's unlikely Nintendo gave devs a 400GFLOPS GPU more than one year ago, capable of let's say, performance X, then once the final GPU is embedded, 5 dev kits revisions later, the performances are X-20%.

 

[test_account]

If WiiU sells better than expected, and PS4 / 720 sell worse than expected, you have the PS2 scenario all over again; weakest hardware dictating game design.

I mean, a lot of people posting in this thread are convinced that the PS4 / 720 are going to be a full generational leap more powerful than the WiiU (they won't be) and that the WiiU is going to fail as a result.

But then a lot of people were convinced that Nintendo were going to go third party after the gamecube.
A lot of people were convinced that the Wii was going to flop, to the extent that MS executives were telling people to buy a 360 AND a Wii.
A lot of people were convinced that the PS3 was going to be inevitable sales leader of the last generation.
A lot of people were convinced that the DS was going to fail, and Nintendo would go back to the gameboy brand.
A lot of people were convinced that the PSP was going to smoke the DS in sales.
A lot of people were convinced that the Vita was going to smoke the 3DS in sales.

If the history of gaming has taught us anything, it's that the market is massively unpredictable.
A lot of people are convinced of things that in hindsight are not true.

A lot of people thought that the 3DS would be smashing hit out the gate too, but that didnt happen either. And i'm sure that a lot of people thought that the N64 would be the best selling system back in that generation. But i agree, the market overall is unpredictable. It is pretty much a wild guess.

 

[nordique]

Well you can play the 'truthiness' card all you want, but the last I checked Wii attach rates are about in line with the PS3s.

This is a crappy venn diagram of the market.

Without knowing what the numbers are for the ? areas, it is literally impossible to make any meaningful statement about userbases for each console and you're just pulling stuff out of your ass.

That middle ? - the one who owns all three consoles - is your actual 'core' gamer.

Exactly.

I'd mentioned earlier, this is tough to comprehend this (because everyone including myself lives in our own bubble) but this is what the actual core gamer is, and its a small percent of the larger more mass market gamer.

very few "core" gamers (relative to the entire market population) only own one system, and if they do it is likely in synchrony with a gamer-level PC, as many posters on GAF who own one console have


the fact is, the Wii U's launch lineup is very strong because of all the popular franchises Nintendo is supporting it with. Those franchises are targeted at the gamers where there is no overlap. Not everyone will pick one up, but its a sizeable market that can move if the experience is enticing enough. Graphics don't matter as much to these gamers by and large; for instance the 360/PS3 were mainly picked up because of their library of games.

When the casual gamers en masse migrated from PS2 to Wii, it wasn't because they felt the Wii had vastly superior graphics.

 

[Jburton]

1) It is impossible to prove a negative. Logic 101.

2) I'm not getting irate or attacking you. You are making statements of facts that aren't true (Wii owners don't buy software, easily checked by looking at numerous topics about this) and general wishy-washy assertions about 'what you reckon' without any proof as to why that might be so.

You are 100% entitled to your own thoughts and opinions, but if they are demonstrably wrong I am 100% entitled to show that.

Of course you are entitled to your opinion and of course to engage in a debate with me.

I am not making statements of fact, rather my opinion, if you consider what I say and/or believe to be wrong or false ... then of course counter.

But you are making statements, stating what I say to be false ... where is your proof?


Also stating I am pulling things out of my ass is an immature way to debate and can be construed as an insult /attack.

 

[F#A#Oo]

Question:

Even if the WiiU is only 1.5 times more powerful than a PS3 or 2/3/4 times more...does it really matter? seems like such an incremental insignificant shift?

PS4/720 are bound to be more powerful in many more ways when released so which ever way one looks at it Nintendo is behind on the hardware front so what does it matter how many times more WiiU is less/more powerful to X, Y and Z?

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

If publishers were serious about making games for Wii U as the primary SKU, they would support the PS3 and 360 with ports of major titles well into 2015.

 

[Reuenthal]

Developers like in new generations to increase their visuals and to create multiplatform games. They also try to advance from what they are doing and develop for a new generation. They are going to pick PS4 and nextbox mostly and to the extend that it is possible Wii-U will get some ports as well. I see it getting some more support than the Wii especially the early years but not a lot from most third parties. But Xbox 360, PS3 and Wii-U will all three sell incredibly because they will be cheaper, perhaps Wii-U will have more casual games and of course I see Nintendo first party selling a lot. I see to some extend a similar generation than this one only Wii-U will sell less than Wii and Xbox360 and PS3 although I am not sure if they will have the incredible PS2 legs, they are still going to be successful for some years in the future. PS4 and the next Xbox will also sell a lot but I see Wii-U selling the most, but it will be a closer competition than Wii vs Sony/Microsoft consoles.

 

[nordique]

Nope. Its just saying the same bullshit that was said about the Wii in 2006. Most of the intelligent posters have already replied and confirmed a likehood of Wii U being closer to PS4/Xbox720 than the current gen. This thread is now just circle jerking around either new/uninformed posters or general nintendo doom mongering in disguise.

lol this seems to be the case with most Wii U threads for some reason

 

[ElFly]

A lot of people were convinced that the Wii was going to flop, to the extent that MS executives were telling people to buy a 360 AND a Wii.

I don't think you are interpreting this event correctly. This only happened after the wii had an impressive display at E3, and MS executives said that people should get a 360 and Wii, so they could play the nintendo exclusives on the Wii and everything else on 360. If anything this was said because they thought the wii was going to be a success.

 

[Diablos54]

The Wii was the darling of the mainstream press for years, it was the in thing among the masses and a huge percentage of them never bought another game ... the Wii became a Wii Sports machine.

Software sales for most games (except Nintendo core and party / dance games) sold abysmally.

For such a vast install base the attach rates for games sold per console where dreadful.

The majority of Wii sales where to non gamers jumping on the bandwagon.

My god... I'm sick of this shit. 8.5 tie ratio. About 0.5 below PS3 and 1 below 360. That DOES NOT = Wii Sports machine. Nice job pulling figures from your ass. So unless this 'huge percentage' which didn't buy anything else on the Wii was combined by a percentage which brought like, 16 or so games, THIS IS FALSE! That is a fact.

 

[wsippel]

On the PC side, most devs are pivoting around a low-end in order to accommodate (or potentially accommodate) a console port in the future. So that's how they're dealing with the larger differences - scaling from a lower-end kernel.

The big big question for Wii-U is what pubs will do for next-generation games. Will they choose to pivot around Wii-U as a baseline, or choose Orbis/Durango as their base and treat Wii-U as its own thing, or as part of ongoing 'legacy' content development.

We won't be able to say for sure for another 12 months or so. That we cannot say for sure now is problematic for Nintendo given the lack of trust capital they have in this area.

The thing is that a lot of the "next gen" features shown at this point are just optional eyecandy. People might expect them from Ps4 and Xbox 3, but you don't really lose anything important by turning them off or using lower quality implementations. As long as the systems can all run the same middleware, most games should be portable.

 

[The Boat]

Where did this idea that a huge install base should lead to a higher attach ratio? It's the complete opposite! Not to mention that attach ratio is little more than something MS started to cling to with 360 when PS3 and Wii came out, because it doesn't really mean a lot. Do you think a publisher goes "our game sold 10 million units, but it's only x% of the installed base, so it's a complete failure"?

 

[Shadow of the BEAST]

If WiiU sells better than expected, and PS4 / 720 sell worse than expected, you have the PS2 scenario all over again; weakest hardware dictating game design.

I mean, a lot of people posting in this thread are convinced that the PS4 / 720 are going to be a full generational leap more powerful than the WiiU (they won't be) and that the WiiU is going to fail as a result.

But then a lot of people were convinced that Nintendo were going to go third party after the gamecube.
A lot of people were convinced that the Wii was going to flop, to the extent that MS executives were telling people to buy a 360 AND a Wii.
A lot of people were convinced that the PS3 was going to be inevitable sales leader of the last generation.
A lot of people were convinced that the DS was going to fail, and Nintendo would go back to the gameboy brand.
A lot of people were convinced that the PSP was going to smoke the DS in sales.
A lot of people were convinced that the Vita was going to smoke the 3DS in sales.

If the history of gaming has taught us anything, it's that the market is massively unpredictable.
A lot of people are convinced of things that in hindsight are not true.

Absolute nonsense. Ps2 was in the same ballpark as xbox and gc, wii. Wiiu will not be comparable to ps4/720.

Games made for the next gen consoles will not be compatible with wiiu without serious sacrifice.

an xbox360 esq hardware can and will never be the lead platform for next gen development. The leap will be to big.

What you have is the wii scenario all over again if its a run away success. Ie developer ignores it completely or give scraps.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

Also stating I am pulling things out of my ass is an immature way to debate and can be construed as an insult /attack.

If you took that phrase as me posting aggressively towards you, then I'm sorry about that - it wasn't meant to be.

I don't think you are interpreting this event correctly. This only happened after the wii had an impressive display at E3, and MS executives said that people should get a 360 and Wii, so they could play the nintendo exclusives on the Wii and everything else on 360. If anything this was said because they thought the wii was going to be a success.

No, MS were thinking 'lol gimmick' and that it wouldn't be a serious threat, that's why they fine with suggesting that as a combo.

Right up until their 'first to 10 million wins' hilariously backfired.

EDIT:

Absolute nonsense. Ps2 was in the same ballpark as xbox and gc, wii. Wiiu will not be comparable to ps4/720.

Games made for the next gen consoles will not be compatible with wiiu without serious sacrifice.

an xbox360 esq hardware can and will never be the lead platform for next gen development. The leap will be to big.

What you have is the wii scenario all over again if its a run away success. Ie developer ignores it completely or give scraps.

You seem pretty certain about the future, based on specs nobody has seen and sales figures that haven't happened.

 

[FyreWulff]

Where did this idea that a huge install base should lead to a higher attach ratio? It's the complete opposite! Not to mention that attach ratio is little more than something MS started to cling to with 360 when PS3 and Wii came out, because it doesn't really mean a lot. Do you think a publisher goes "our game sold 10 million units, but it's only x% of the installed base, so it's a complete failure"?

Yeah. attach ratio is always crowed by the lower placed guys. Nintendo did it in the GameCube era, now MS/Sony lay it. Whoever is last/second next time around will be talking about it a lot too. It's all about spinning the numbers.

 

[Jburton]

If you took that phrase as me posting aggressively towards you, then I'm sorry about that - it wasn't meant to be.

No problem buddy.

 

[Shadow of the BEAST]

EDIT:


You seem pretty certain about the future, based on specs nobody has seen and sales figures that haven't happened.

Yes i am very certain both ps4 and 720 will be at minimum a generational leap.

Unlike wiiu, which is comparable 360.

 

[elongation]

Have we got more on this other than some anonymous ubisoft employee hearsay?

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

Yes i am very certain both ps4 and 720 will be at minimum a generational leap.

Unlike wiiu, which is comparable 360.

Well, we'll see.

I don't expect PS4 or 720 to be hitting current high end PC specs, and I don't expect someone like Retro to not release something that definitively can't be done on the 360.

EDIT:

Yeah. attach ratio is always crowed by the lower placed guys. Nintendo did it in the GameCube era, now MS/Sony lay it. Whoever is last/second next time around will be talking about it a lot too. It's all about spinning the numbers.

It isn't entirely meaningless; it gives a broad overview of an installbases likelihood of buying software, which is useful for third parties to get an idea of potential sales from.
Sony have never ever bragged about the PSPs attach rate, for example.

 

[v1oz]

You're welcomed

For the RV700, it's seems it's not the 1 teraflop "promised" by an AMD employee some times ago (so the higher-end of this chips family, like the RV790 or RV770). But it won't be the RV710 either. Of course, you have to add the word "comparable" before every sentence here, what we'll get in the retail unit, that developers certainly play with on the mass production dev kits they owned since a few weeks, isn't an off-the-shelf RV700, it's customized beyond recognition, and we had a lot of good folks in the speculation thread explaining what they could have added/modified/removed on those chips. But the target specs are valid at least for the minimum expectable performances, it's unlikely Nintendo gave devs a 400GFLOPS GPU more than one year ago, capable of let's say, performance X, then once the final GPU is embedded, 5 dev kits revisions later, the performances are X-20%.

Right, but with a system with 3x the memory of PS3/360 and 400GFLOPS on the GPU side. We really should have seen better graphics at E3 with AA and better texturing. Honestly if I worked at the marketing department, at a huge new hardware unveiling, I wouldn't have shown many of those games in their current state.

 

[test_account]

Regarding graphics, i think it is interesting that we didnt even see a new tech demo. The bird and Zelda demo we saw last year was much more impressive graphical wise than anything i saw from this year's E3. And that is kinda "funny" concidering that those two tech demos are a year old.

 

[Shadow of the BEAST]

Well, we'll see.

I don't expect PS4 or 720 to be hitting current high end PC specs, and I don't expect someone like Retro to not release something that definitively can't be done on the 360.

ps4/720 will be a generational leap compared to 360. And the games will look signifcantly better than anything on pc today. weather or not the hard numbers are there is not really relevant.

And any game that is specifically tailored to a specific hardware will be hard to recreate on a platform within the same generation. Even the xbox had some trouble with some of the games that where developed for ps2.

Porting ps4/720 to wiiu will lead to the same sort of sacrifice we saw with wii. And developing the game first for wiiu, will make the game look bad compared to the games developed with next gen hardware in mind.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

ps4/720 will be a generational leap compared to 360. And the games will look signifcantly better than anything on pc today.

Can't help but feel you're setting yourself up for some massive disapointment there, as the UE4 tech demo is running on current PC hardware and won't be hitting that same level of IQ on any console released next year.

 

[Shadow of the BEAST]

Can't help but feel you're setting yourself up for some massive disapointment there, as the UE4 tech demo is running on current PC hardware and won't be hitting that same level of IQ on any console released next year.

it will look better on console. Consoles have the benefit of being a closed environment. So even if its weaker on paper. The optimisation will greatly make up for it.

 

[Durante]

Well, we'll see.

I don't expect PS4 or 720 to be hitting current high end PC specs, and I don't expect someone like Retro to not release something that definitively can't be done on the 360.

They don't need to be hitting current high end PC specs -- those are already beyond a traditional generational leap from 360, and will certainly be even further ahead by the time those consoles are released.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

the fact is, the Wii U's launch lineup is very strong because of all the popular franchises Nintendo is supporting it with. Those franchises are targeted at the gamers where there is no overlap. Not everyone will pick one up, but its a sizeable market that can move if the experience is enticing enough. Graphics don't matter as much to these gamers by and large; for instance the 360/PS3 were mainly picked up because of their library of games.

This isn't going to cut it. I don't know how one comes to this conclusion. THe lineup as it looks is not bad but certainly not strong. Not by any stretch.

 

[cyberheater]

Nope. Its just saying the same bullshit that was said about the Wii in 2006. Most of the intelligent posters have already replied and confirmed a likehood of Wii U being closer to PS4/Xbox720 than the current gen.

Ha ha ha. Just no. It's not even going to be close.

Well you can play the 'truthiness' card all you want, but the last I checked Wii attach rates are about in line with the PS3s.

I just checked. I thought this can't be right. We don't even play it. But I've got at least 10 games for my Wii. I was shocked. Attach rate confirmed.

 

[gofreak]

The thing is that a lot of the "next gen" features shown at this point are just optional eyecandy. People might expect them from Ps4 and Xbox 3, but you don't really lose anything important by turning them off or using lower quality implementations. As long as the systems can all run the same middleware, most games should be portable.

I think it's impossible to talk about the scalability of next-gen games, as opposed to next-gen graphics, at this point. What you say might be true or might be false.

If it is true, it would effectively imply that there won't be the same kind of fundamental software transition we have seen in previous generations. That software will more or less scale from PS3 - > PS4, with just varying levels of graphical niceness. I've seen this argument a couple of times since E3. I think it wouldn't improve Nintendo's situation so much as disimprove everyone else's - creating challenges for all the platforms in terms of generating excitement for new platforms.

I'm not sure this is what the rumblings are indicating though. UE4, the Star Wars demo, Agni's Philosophy...they are all being talked about in a way that is exclusive of current hardware. And - notably - without mention of Wii U. I think there may be a point beyond which it just becomes pointless to downport something without it losing all identity as a 'next-gen' game. There doesn't seem to be any talk about 'up-porting' stuff being the focus of next-gen attention, which might better fit the narrative of Wii-U as a kind of low-end PS2 to the next-gen.

There'll probably be a fairly fuzzy 'figuring it out' period. But I don't think a very encouraging picture has been painted yet for Wii-U, and there doesn't seem to be much reward in giving it the benefit of the doubt until we know for sure.

 

[IdeaMan]

Right, but with a system with 3x the memory of PS3/360 and 400GFLOPS on the GPU side. We really should have seen better graphics at E3 with AA and better texturing. Honestly if I worked at the marketing department, at a huge new hardware unveiling, I wouldn't have shown many of those games in their current state.

The "disappointment" of a few people about the Wii U visuals we saw at E3 isn't originating from a hypothetic lack of power of the system. It's for the most part, from the projects showed, as a large bunch of them started their development on previous platforms, sometimes on Wii. Games tailored from A to Z for the Wii U will take advantage of its noticeable leap in capabilities compare to the current gen HD. For another part, it comes from the dev kits themselves, the hardware inside, their freshness as the newest were supplied just a few weeks before E3, even days for the special drivers, Wii U discs, and the final form Wii U dev kits with a built-in drive. There will be AA in launch titles. There's no doubt about it, can't be more specific than that sorry.

But i must admit that they could have been more proactive in their communication during the show, explaining how it's work-in-progress titles, how some parts are still in flux, in completion, how it will be more impressive at release, etc.

 

[schuelma]

There'll probably be a fairly fuzzy 'figuring it out' period. But I don't think a very encouraging picture has been painted yet for Wii-U, and there doesn't seem to be much reward in giving it the benefit of the doubt until we know for sure.

Realistically, I think you are probably correct. I do not foresee big new IP's using the latest tech coming to Wii U.

What I think is the best case scenario for Nintendo is A- non gimped versions of the big mass appeal Western franchises like CoD and Madden (i.e, not like how the Wii was treated), and B-significant Japanese third party support.

I think B is pretty realistic. While obviously Japanese companies want to focus on the West more and more, the bottom line is the Xbox brand is dead in Japan and it took 4 years of jamming top notch franchises down Japan's throats before the PS3 became a somewhat healthy ecosystem. I think Nintendo has a lot more pull in Japan than in the West. We'll see..

 

[11redder]

If the Wii was a Wii Sports machine for the majority of owners, i.e. at least 51%, then the remaining 49% (46.6 million odd) had an attach rate of over 16 games. Does that mean the Wii was home to the "hardest" of the "hardcore" this generation?

 

[marc^o^]

If the Wii was a Wii Sports machine for the majority of owners, i.e. at least 51%, then the remaining 49% (46.6 million odd) had an attach rate of over 16 games. Does that mean the Wii was home to the "hardest" of the "hardcore" this generation?

Add the insane amount of piracy, and it's getting freaky.

 

[Linkhero1]

I'm sorry, i fail to see how withholding a known franchise, that is getting great reviews all over, from a 3rd party deprived system, is a smart business move. But maybe i'm too old to see it. And you don't think Nintendo made or published other games that deserved tweaking? The funny thing is, i don't think Nintendo published the game in Japan, but NOA bought the publishing rights... just to not release it.

I've gotten my hands on Disaster and I'm glad it wasn't localized. I probably would have bought it without realizing that it's a pretty terrible game. I don't see anything else but fatal frame 4 worth localizing, so it doesn't bother me that it didn't make it.

People always want to put the blame on Reggie, but it's not always his choice. He does have some say in localizing titles, but if NCL believes he's making the wrong decision then they could always step in and say "Look...Reggie, this game needs to be out in NA, so we're going to force you to publish it." They didn't step in with Xenoblade, Last Story or Fatal Frame 4. Are you telling me that Iwata doesn't think that the Western audience would like any of those games? Because that's the only reason he would have not corrected Reggie's choices. I just don't believe it's fair to entirely blame Reggie on the localization situation.

 

[Grampa Simpson]

It tells us that the spec released by the same site earlier this week are more credible. The same source sending pics of the Dev kit is very likely the one's supplying that Wii U technical feature set.

Whowherewhat? I wanna see.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

And developing the game first for wiiu, will make the game look bad compared to the games developed with next gen hardware in mind.

Give such games the sort of enhancements we should be seeing from PS360->WiiU ports (like improved textures, lighting, resolution, AA), and I don't think the difference would be very great.

 

[GhostTrick]

Even if WiiU's GPU will support DX11 features, I still think Nintendo should have gone with more thab a 400-500Gflops GPU. 800Gflops would have been good. 1Tflops would have been perfect.
But now, they won't have multiplateform that push Xbox-PS4.

 

[Shadow of the BEAST]

Even if WiiU's GPU will support DX11 features, I still think Nintendo should have gone with more thab a 400-500Gflops GPU. 800Gflops would have been good. 1Tflops would have been perfect.
But now, they won't have multiplateform that push Xbox-PS4.

Yep.

Its wii all over again.