Support NeoGAF

[nordique]

While its true that there were some really cheap ports, you are mostly wrong. Most of them were not exactly the same. And even the ones that were it was not because of the console, but publishers wanting to make easy money.

So how can you be so sure the same cannot be said of Wii U?


Facts are, even with little we know, the system on paper is about 2-3x raw power of a 360

Even if on screen the games don't look too different, doesn't mean they won't with time. Right now, games are "on par" graphically no question, but that might have more to do with being cheap games or rushed ports....just as you said...


Besides, it doesn't matter, even if the Wii U was weaker than the 360, it would still be a next gen console. You were originally claiming it wasn't, but it is. Power doesn't differentiate generations.

Its like saying you and your parents are of the same generation. You aren't. You're the next generation from your parents.

 

[apana]

It's very high quality tape this time so that should give the Wii U a nice boost.

 

[Metalmurphy]

So how can you be so sure the same cannot be said of Wii U?

Facts are, even with little we know, the system on paper is about 2-3x raw power of a 360

Even if on screen the games don't look too different, doesn't mean they won't with time.

Besides, it doesn't matter, even if the Wii U was weaker than the 360, it would still be a next gen console. You were originally claiming it wasn't, but it is. Power doesn't differentiate generations.

Its like saying you and your parents are of the same generation. You aren't. You're the next generation from your parents.

Because NOTHING shown so far has even been remotely close to the differences we saw between even the best looking Xbox games and the Xbox 360 release titles.

 

[specialguy]

It's very high quality tape this time so that should give the Wii U a nice boost.

Genuine Duck (Tm) tape this time, not that cheap knockoff from last time.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

Because some people keep trying to rewrite accepted definitions for the sake of dismissing products they don't like.

Or maybe they just consider it a current/bridge-gen system. The Webster's Oxford Institute of God-Tier English Dictionary might define it as so but is that how you really go about things in the real world? If Toyota's next-gen Camry (cars go by generations as well) was the same exact car as the current gen version except with an extra cup holder, would you really consider that next-gen? Taking the definition literally it would be, but that's not how things work.

 

[1-UP]

...

Tech power doesn't differentiate generations.

 

[ShirAhava]

uhhh I'm just going to post this here...for reference

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_game_consoles

 

[Rolf NB]

Facts are, even with little we know, the system on paper is about 2-3x raw power of a 360

Oh brother.

 

[nordique]

Because NOTHING shown so far has even been remotely close to the differences we saw between even the best looking Xbox games and the Xbox 360 release titles.

Honestly, you are now turning this into a graphical debate...

your original argument was Wii U is current gen.

It is not

That's all there is to it.

Its a next gen console, its the first next gen console; I won't get into a cyclical argument, which this is already becoming

 

[Metalmurphy]

Tech power doesn't differentiate generations.

Well, that's your opinion, mine is that it's a major factor in it. And as I've said before, I'm not the only one that shares my line of though, even developers do.

 

[Majmun]

Tech power doesn't differentiate generations.

Maybe not for Nintendo.

But everywhere else it does.

Look at cellphone technology or PC's etc. Each new generation has more powerful hardware.

New generation means new and beter technology, more hardware power etc. Nintendo is basically the only odd one out.

 

[RagnarokX]

I agree PS3/360 were overpowered and overcostly when they came out, but still, Wii's specs could have been better. No shades and no high definition support didn't help it, even for the time's standard.

I don't think Nintendo ever expected Wii to last this long. I think Wii was a short-term ploy to reinvent their company image and dispel the stigma associated with their brands. They would have come out with an HD console as soon as it was actually viable, but Wii's success pushed back their plans a few years. Remember, the price increase for Wii wasn't their idea.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

Why don't we just call the PS4 and 720 Next-Next Gen?

 

[Metalmurphy]

Why don't we just call the PS4 and 720 Next-Next Gen?

People will once they start seeing the discrepancy between the 3 systems.

 

[DragonSworne]

People will once they start seeing the discrepancy between the 3 systems.

What difference?

 

[RagnarokX]

Well, that's your opinion, mine is that it's a major factor in it. And as I've said before, I'm not the only one that shares my line of though, even developers do.

You can't have an opinion counter to facts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_(seventh_generation)

 

[Diablos54]

Maybe not for Nintendo.

But everywhere else it does.

Look at cellphone technology or PC's etc. Each new generation has more powerful hardware.

New generation means new and beter technology, more hardware power etc. Nintendo is basically the only odd one.

But... This is more powerful than current gen hardware. Just because the leap isn't as big doesn't mean it isn't there. Plus you have the controller. Tech is more than just power and chips.

People will once they start seeing the discrepancy between the 3 systems.

I doubt it. Consoles have more aspects to them than just power.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

Or maybe they just consider it a current/bridge-gen system. The Webster's Oxford Institute of God-Tier English Dictionary might define it as so but is that how you really go about things in the real world? If Toyota's next-gen Camry (cars go by generations as well) was the same exact car as the current gen version except with an extra cup holder, would you really consider that next-gen? Taking the definition literally it would be, but that's not how things work.

By the way, I'm proud to have brought the thread to the car analogy phase. These threads always have a car analogy in them and 9 times out of 10 it's a Toyota.

 

[nordique]

Oh brother.

Sorry, I know that seems contradictory, but that's what it seems it is turning out to be...everything from 2x the RAM (3x the eDRAM), a GPU with at least twice the GFLOPS...3x the CPU cache...little things, from what GPUs were apparently in the early devkits to pieces put together by other posters, but it gives an idea where it will stand

 

[EatChildren]

People will once they start seeing the discrepancy between the 3 systems.

If this generation has shown anything, it's that unless you're using universally agreed definitions for 'next generation', then 'next generation' in actuality means jack shit. It's a buzz word used by PR machines. For an entire current generation people have been marketing the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and certain televisions as 'next generation'. My Unreal Tournament 3 case had "next generation gameplay" on the back. What the fuck does that even mean?

 

[test_account]

This is one of the poorest rebuttals I have ever seen. Put some effort into in.

Anyways, its a shame we got this revisionist thing going on when discussing the term "next gen". It's also funny that this has never been brought up prior to this gen.

EDIT: Even if you can argue that it was, I highly doubt it was discussed to these ridiculous lengths.

Poor or not, what he said was true I thought it was an excellent answer in a funny way hehe.

The reason why it was more common in this generation is because the difference in hardware power has never been that big before. The PS3 and Xbox 360 was often referred to as the "next gen systems" for years, simply referring to the graphical preformance.

I do agree that WiiU is next generation though, it belongs in the 8th generation (or what the next generation is).

 

[RagnarokX]

Poor or not, what he said was true I thought it was an excellent answer in a funny way hehe.

The reason why it was more common in this generation is because the difference in hardware power has never been that big before. The PS3 and Xbox 360 was often referred to as the "next gen systems" for years, simply referring to the graphical preformance.

I do agree that WiiU is next generation though, it belongs in the 8th generation (or what the next generation is).

No, it's not a good rebuttal. People debate whether or not events that happened happened. That doesn't make it debatable.

 

[MadeInBeats]

Interesting round-up of some Wii U CPU speculation. Will it be a PowerPC 476FP ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4Po_hUEyVw

 

[Majmun]

But... This is more powerful than current gen hardware. Just because the leap isn't as big doesn't mean it isn't there. Plus you have the controller. Tech is more than just power and chips.

That's definitely true, when talking about the controler. It should bring new ways to play games, and I'm looking forward to it.

But when it comes to power, the WiiU won't be much different than this current gen. I'm expecting the same difference in power that we saw between the Ps2(ps360) and Xbox(WiiU).

The current gen is hugely divided. We have the Wii and the Ps360. The Wii won the race, but developers chose the Ps360 as their next gen system of choice. Mainly for showing off (costly) new technology seen in games. Something that would not be possible on Wii hardware.
And I'm sure developers will choose Ps4/720 as their main platfrom for the same reason. Technology evolves, and a developer's ambition to do something with that technology can't be stopped.

 

[test_account]

No, it's not a good rebuttal. People debate whether or not events that happened happened. That doesn't make it debatable.

When people comment on something and counter whats being said, that in itself can be defined as debating. That is why i though his answer was pretty good in a humoristic way

 

[SmokyDave]

If this generation has shown anything, it's that unless you're using universally agreed definitions for 'next generation', then 'next generation' in actuality means jack shit. It's a buzz word used by PR machines. For an entire current generation people have been marketing the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and certain televisions as 'next generation'. My Unreal Tournament 3 case had "next generation gameplay" on the back. What the fuck does that even mean?

It just means 'the next generation'. It always used to be synonymous with a huge leap in power but it isn't anymore (for 1 of the 3 players). That's all there is to it.

If the PS4/720 are marginal upgrades it will shock the shit out of people and may well signal the death of what we formerly understood as a 'generational leap'.

 

[Metalmurphy]

If this generation has shown anything, it's that unless you're using universally agreed definitions for 'next generation', then 'next generation' in actuality means jack shit. It's a buzz word used by PR machines. For an entire current generation people have been marketing the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and certain televisions as 'next generation'. My Unreal Tournament 3 case had "next generation gameplay" on the back. What the fuck does that even mean?

But don't those TVs back that statement with some new impressive tech?

Anyway, as for this generation, that's what I said before, Nintendo changed the "rules" this generation with the Wii. But before it all generations were marked with an increase in power, personally, that's still how I'll define generations. Because the types of games we get be tied to.

And I also think the Wii U will be on a generation of its own tbh, because of both it's controller with the screen, and the specs.

As for UT, yeah, nothing but marketing on the box. UT on next gen consoles = next gen gameplay lol

 

[Saint Gregory]

...And I'm sure developers will choose Ps4/720 as their main platfrom for the same reason. Technology evolves, and a developer's ambition to do something with that technology can't be stopped.

IDK, it seems like a lot of developers' ambitions were stopped during this gen. I'd hate to see that continue into the next.

It just means 'the next generation'. It always used to be synonymous with a huge leap in power but it isn't anymore (for 1 of the 3 players). That's all there is to it.

If the PS4/720 are marginal upgrades it will shock the shit out of people and may well signal the death of what we formerly understood as a 'generational leap'.

But the Wii U is a huge leap in power... for Nintendo. They just took off for a gen in the arms race.

 

[sp3000]

If this generation has shown anything, it's that unless you're using universally agreed definitions for 'next generation', then 'next generation' in actuality means jack shit. It's a buzz word used by PR machines. For an entire current generation people have been marketing the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and certain televisions as 'next generation'. My Unreal Tournament 3 case had "next generation gameplay" on the back. What the fuck does that even mean?

It allowed mods on PS3. Name me one other game that let's you do that.

 

[shinra-bansho]

In those cases they are more than just quick ports, because the hardware was obviously a much larger jump than in this case. In a traditional generational jump, say PS2- PS3 the PS3 games obviously weren't ports, but versions of the same game designed for the PS3. They were shoddy because they were rushed for launch, these are shoddy because they are trying to cut and paste, two completely different scenarios.

Wii-U's CPU uses pretty different architecture if I understand correctly. It is OOE, and has a DSP to take additional load off of the CPU, as well as the capability to offload some of the work onto the reasonably powerful GPU and its edram. Are the developers who are complaining, the ones guilty of quick lazy port jobs taking advantage of these features that separate the Wii-U's CPU from the older systems? Doubtful.

Interesting. Is there something to suggest that early gen games were built from the ground up, I just assumed they tended to be up-ports. For example Kameo.

Question for anyone technical: At what increase in power can one, because of the sheer increase in power, run unoptimized/ported code and have superior performance?

Does it need to be as implied a 10x bump?

Which is likely why we haven't heard the complaints from studio's designing original content, or studio's optimizing their ports for Wii U, such as Vigil, Ubisoft, or Gearbox etc...

There's really no point in publicly slagging something you're trying to build an audience on obviously.

 

[SmokyDave]

But the Wii U is a huge leap in power... for Nintendo. They just took off for a gen in the arms race.

Indeed, viewed in isolation the Wii-U is a traditional generational leap. Where it differs from every gen prior to the Wii is in the fact that it really isn't that much more powerful than the console hardware that is already available and has been available for the entirety of this 'generation'. Imagine the Megadrive trying to hang with the PS1 or the Saturn trying to hang with the GameCube. They'd have no chance. That doesn't seem so with 360/PS3 and the Wii-U. Hell, the fact we can even debate that says it all.

 

[1-UP]

PowerPC 476FP. Believe.

 

[RagnarokX]

When people comment on something and counter whats being said, that in itself can be defined as debating. That is why i though his answer was pretty good in a humoristic way

That's a bs definition of debatable, though. For something to be considered "debatable" the debate has to be legitimate; lack of facts, speculative, something subjective. I mean, no informed person in their right mind would say that whether or not evolution occurs is "debatable", that's a verifiable fact, but people sure as hell have that debate.

 

[EatChildren]

It just means 'the next generation'. It always used to be synonymous with a huge leap in power but it isn't anymore (for 1 of the 3 players). That's all there is to it.

If the PS4/720 are marginal upgrades it will shock the shit out of people and may well signal the death of what we formerly understood as a 'generational leap'.

This is my point though. Either 'next generation' has a universally agreeable, scientific definition. Or it doesn't. If it's the former, you're either right or wrong with your assessment. If it's the latter, then no matter how much you argue, your argument doesn't mean shit because 'next generation' is subjective.

If people feel 'next generation' equates to some unspecified though subjectively observable leap in pure processing power and/or graphical presentation, then fine. The Wii U probably isn't next generation. But no matter how much you might debate it, you're not objectively right, and your opinion is limited to yourself and those that share it.

At the very least, and under the strictest definitions, the Wii U is the 'next generation' system from Nintendo.

It allowed mods on PS3. Name me one other game that let's you do that.

I had it on PC. It did nothing remotely definable as 'next generation gameplay'.

 

[Log4Girlz]

This is my point though. Either 'next generation' has a universally agreeable, scientific definition. Or it doesn't. If it's the former, you're either right or wrong with your assessment. If it's the latter, then no matter how much you argue, your argument doesn't mean shit because 'next generation' is subjective.

If people feel 'next generation' equates to some unspecified though subjectively observable leap in pure processing power and/or graphical presentation, then fine. The Wii U probably isn't next generation. But no matter how much you might debate it, you're not objectively right, and your opinion is limited to yourself and those that share it.

At the very least, and under the strictest definitions, the Wii U is the 'next generation' system from Nintendo.

That's true, it is subjective, but enough people can share a sentiment that for the sake of argument, we can come to a generally held standard. For instance, the Wii was the "next generation" system for Nintendo, sure, but I think the vast majority of gamers did not consider it a "next generation" system.

 

[wsippel]

why are we even discussing DX10/11 in a nintendo system? openGL is quite a diffrent (faster and better beast then DirectX)

Nintendo uses neither DirectX nor OpenGL, though...

On Gamecube and Wii, they used GX, which was modelled after Silicon Graphics GL (not OpenGL). On 3DS, they support OpenGL - or more precisely DMPGL, a custom version of OpenGL|ES by DMP - as one of several available APIs, but it's considered the least optimal solution and should only be used for ports if devs can't be arsed to rework the engine properly. And on Wii U, they use GX2.

OpenGL and Direct3D serve as a form of abstraction, so that engines are able to run on different GPUs with different featuresets and implementations. As both APIs are high level, they obviously introduce a significant overhead and performance isn't predictable. Consoles use low level APIs (like GX) or direct register access as compatibility and interoperability don't matter. Chip specific low level APIs have much less overhead and are therefore more efficient, more predictable and ultimately faster.

Funny sidenote: Contrary to popular opinion, Microsoft's consoles do NOT use Direct3D. They use a custom API that's very similar, but far more low level.

 

[Majmun]

IDK, it seems like a lot of developers' ambitions were stopped during this gen. I'd hate to see that continue into the next.

It's something we can't stop. And yeah, better technology doesn't automatically mean better games. Super Mario Galaxy and Xenoblade belong in my top 5 best games of this generation. And both games were better without the motion controls. HD graphics would've been a plus, though

I'm just glad that Nintendo is entering the HD market. Finally...

 

[SmokyDave]

This is my point though. Either 'next generation' has a universally agreeable, scientific definition. Or it doesn't. If it's the former, you're either right or wrong with your assessment. If it's the latter, then no matter how much you argue, your argument doesn't mean shit because 'next generation' is subjective.

If people feel 'next generation' equates to some unspecified though subjectively observable leap in pure processing power and/or graphical presentation, then fine. The Wii U probably isn't next generation. But no matter how much you might debate it, you're not objectively right, and your opinion is limited to yourself and those that share it.

At the very least, and under the strictest definitions, the Wii U is the 'next generation' system from Nintendo.

Oh absolutely. It's totally subjective. The iPhone 5 is next-gen but not in the way most people will mean it when they refer to the successors of the HD twins. It's an utterly subjective term. I think the friction comes from the fact that 'next-gen' used to be synonymous with a large jump in power but that was just because we took that for granted, not because it was actually an essential component of being 'next-gen'.

I blame Sony and their 'next-gen starts when we say so'.

 

[RagnarokX]

This is my point though. Either 'next generation' has a universally agreeable, scientific definition. Or it doesn't. If it's the former, you're either right or wrong with your assessment. If it's the latter, then no matter how much you argue, your argument doesn't mean shit because 'next generation' is subjective.

If people feel 'next generation' equates to some unspecified though subjectively observable leap in pure processing power and/or graphical presentation, then fine. The Wii U probably isn't next generation. But no matter how much you might debate it, you're not objectively right, and your opinion is limited to yourself and those that share it.

At the very least, and under the strictest definitions, the Wii U is the 'next generation' system from Nintendo.



I had it on PC. It did nothing remotely definable as 'next generation gameplay'.

And even if you go with a power definition of next gen, you have to set some arbitrary subjective gate to keep WiiU out. You can't just say next gen is more powerful because WiiU IS more powerful even if slightly. And that doesn't take into account unique ways of advancing like Nintendo's new controllers. It makes more sense to use an objective scientific definition.

 

[Saint Gregory]

Indeed, viewed in isolation the Wii-U is a traditional generational leap. Where it differs from every gen prior to the Wii is in the fact that it really isn't that much more powerful than the console hardware that is already available and has been available for the entirety of this 'generation'. Imagine the Megadrive trying to hang with the PS1 or the Saturn trying to hang with the GameCube. They'd have no chance. That doesn't seem so with 360/PS3 and the Wii-U. Hell, the fact we can even debate that says it all.

Yes, it does seem like madness. Nintendo releasing the Wii at the level of power it has against the PS360 a year after the generation began was also madness but it worked out for them somehow.

As much as it's frustrating seeing one party in console business clearly bucking against what everyone else is doing can be I find it hard to criticize Nintendo because they've been doing what they've been doing for so long and even when they fail things tend to work out for them.

 

[test_account]

That's a bs definition of debatable, though. For something to be considered "debatable" the debate has to be legitimate; lack of facts, speculative, something subjective. I mean, no informed person in their right mind would say that whether or not evolution occurs is "debatable", that's a verifiable fact, but people sure as hell have that debate.

I wouldnt say that it is bs definition. Debating is about presenting points/thoughts on a subject. In this case, this is exactly what happened (well, it happened mostly after that quote). He said why he ment what he ment, and people said their opinions about it too. But i think he ment it more as a humoristic reply, that is why i thought it was a great reply

 

[Dion Blaster]

So is the Wii U basically gonna be a stop-gap between this gen and next gen, and where on the line it actually exists will be unknown until the 720/PS4 are unveiled?

Nintendo fan here who will buy it eventually I'm sure, just curious.

 

[wsippel]

So is the Wii U basically gonna be a stop-gap between this gen and next gen, and where on the line it actually exists will be unknown until the 720/PS4 are unveiled?

Pretty much, yes.

 

[RedSwirl]

Well, that's your opinion, mine is that it's a major factor in it. And as I've said before, I'm not the only one that shares my line of though, even developers do.

To be honest, I don't think graphics and hardware power were the most important factor separating this generation from the last. The most important thing was probably the upgrade in services available on a console - this was the first time game consoles had complex operating systems that provided different kinds of entertainment and social networking. That's what I think differentiated this generation the most.

 

[EatChildren]

Oh absolutely. It's totally subjective. The iPhone 5 is next-gen but not in the way most people will mean it when they refer to the successors of the HD twins. It's an utterly subjective term. I think the friction comes from the fact that 'next-gen' used to be synonymous with a large jump in power but that was just because we took that for granted, not because it was actually an essential component of being 'next-gen'.

This I agree with. I guess that's why I find the argument so silly. If someone wants an unmeasurable, subjective perception of processing power and graphical capabilities to define 'next generation' for them, fine. I personally think it's an extremely limited, restrictive perception of generation definition.

Like, I think what the Wii bought to the table in the form of controller technology, later adopted and/or influencing peripherals for the PS3 and X360, constitutes as 'next generation' beyond the obvious definition of it being Nintendo's own next generation system. And I feel similar to the Wii U. It's Nintendo's next generation unit. It, by all accounts, does outclass the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 to some degree. And its primary method of control is distant from what the current generation offers. That is more than enough for me to define a system as 'next generation'.

Anyway, my point is that Unreal Tournament 3 was a shitty Unreal Tournament game and the original is still the best.

 

[RagnarokX]

I wouldnt say that it is bs definition. Debating is about presenting points/thoughts on a subject. In this case, this is exactly what happened (well, it happened mostly after that quote). But i think he ment it more as a humoristic reply, that is why i thought it was a great reply

It's playing with words. He knows what debatable meant in the context of the discussion and he changed to a weaker definition to back out of his argument. People can debate things that aren't debatable.

 

[AzaK]

I don't think Nintendo ever expected Wii to last this long. I think Wii was a short-term ploy to reinvent their company image and dispel the stigma associated with their brands. They would have come out with an HD console as soon as it was actually viable, but Wii's success pushed back their plans a few years. Remember, the price increase for Wii wasn't their idea.

Interesting and quite possible that they were not thinking it'd last 6 years. However I think there was one thing they got wrong - third party support. They expected to get a really good supply of third party games, especially the western ones and that just did not happen. That meant they had to rely more on the dedicated Nintendo fan that likes Japanese titles and the more fickle casual market. The former likely also got an HD console, and the latter lost a lot of interest and probably started gaming on phones/tablets (To put it in very general terms)

If they had have had good western third party support I think the Wii might have had more legs. To do that they should have made a machine that was not so different to the competition. This is what they are attempting to do with the Wii U. It's an extension of the Wii concept of gaming for all, with some corrections for the missteps they took.

 

[sp3000]

Anyway, my point is that Unreal Tournament 3 was a shitty Unreal Tournament game and the original is still the best.

Not to derail the thread too much, but I never got where this sentiment came from. Yeah it was released as a beta pretty much, but bf3 was also.

To this day, there is not a single game this generation that does the arena shooter gameplay better.

I'm pretty sure no matter how good UT3 was when it released, it would have still sold badly due to releasing the same time as COD and Halo.

 

[test_account]

It's playing with words. He knows what debatable meant in the context of the discussion and he changed to a weaker definition to back out of his argument.

I know what you mean, i just saw the humor in his reply because he got counter arguements about what he said =)

 

[Saint Gregory]

It's something we can't stop. And yeah, better technology doesn't automatically mean better games. Super Mario Galaxy and Xenoblade belong in my top 5 best games of this generation. And both games were better without the motion controls. HD graphics would've been a plus, though

I'm just glad that Nintendo is entering the HD market. Finally...

Sorry, I was probably being to vague with that answer to get my meaning across.

This gen way too many developers over extended themselves getting up to speed with HD development which lead to the crazy amount of studio closures we saw this gen. Things should be better going forward but I think a lot of developers would be better served by hitting the reset button and sticking to current gen developing.