Wii U Speculation Thread of Brains Beware: Wii U Re-Unveiling At E3 2012
- Thread starter bgassassin
- Start date
- Status
bgassassin
Member
Could be one of those situations where the title is made separately from the article. I didn't even pay attention to the title till sarusama said something.
Anyway, Madden is one of the main reasons for a second Upad.
Anyway, Madden is one of the main reasons for a second Upad.
In terms of 1st party game that would be good for launch, I'd go for:
Something like Wii sports, basically a "this is what this system can do" collection of mini games.
Brain Training on a bigger scale. You've got the touch screen and mic like the DS and Brain Training was a huge system seller.
Pikmin 3 - Games like that are just going to work so well with the controller.
Something like Wii sports, basically a "this is what this system can do" collection of mini games.
Brain Training on a bigger scale. You've got the touch screen and mic like the DS and Brain Training was a huge system seller.
Pikmin 3 - Games like that are just going to work so well with the controller.
I'm kind of in the 'PLEASE tell us how high the specs of WiiU are' camp. But does it really matter in the end? We know MS and Sony based on timing alone will have much more impressive consoles. Add to that that they are much more tech oriented aswell. And then add that Nintendo is being cheap lately wherever possible. As well as incredibly stubborn (Xenoblade fiasco recently). I think it's best for everyones sanity here on GAF to stop putting so much emphasis on the specs. It most likely is just barely powerful enough for Reggie to check the HD box in the eyes of the general consumer.
AceBandage
Banned
Coolwhip said:
wat
"Barely powerful enough to do HD" would be a Wii with a few extra MB of video RAM.
AceBandage
Banned
Mmm, ok, if you say so. So far nothing really points to that, but if you say so.
Coolwhip said:
Nintendo could build a box twice as powerful as those consoles, even with the Wii U pad's price tacked on, and still be just as cheap to make as a launch Wii was. I could go on, but I doubt it will really change anyone's mind. Just go do so research on HD4000 series, and you'll see that even the 4670 would be much faster than the 360, and could be bought in bulk under 20 bucks (chip w/o ram). Wii's GPU cost ~$29 at launch.
http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/15/wii-manufacturing-costs-ring-up-to-just-158/
AceBandage
Banned
Well, there are a few key differences between the Wii U and the Wii in terms of design.
They are now using a new Blue Laser tech disc drive which is much more expensive than the Red Laser drives that DVDs use.
They are using a very modern CPU that seems to have almost been custom built for the system.
They are using a somewhat modern GPU.
They have a controller that costs much more to produce this time around.
They are now using a new Blue Laser tech disc drive which is much more expensive than the Red Laser drives that DVDs use.
They are using a very modern CPU that seems to have almost been custom built for the system.
They are using a somewhat modern GPU.
They have a controller that costs much more to produce this time around.
I know. I'm going to run on the assumption of a $350 launch price and ~$250 to build. (No, I don't think they've learned their lesson from the 3DS. Honestly, I expect the Nintendo of next gen to be the Sony of this gen as far as sales and PR go. With how HORRIBLE they've been this year, you can't blame me for losing trust and confidence in them. They've done nothing right this year at all as a business.)AceBandage said:
Thunder Monkey
Banned
In the eyes of the general consumer the PS3 and 360 are HD systems.Coolwhip said:
If the WiiU eclipses that by any margin it will be known as that powerful HD machine. Running at higher resmolushuns and everythin.
Thunder Monkey said:
Nintendo so far has downplayed the specs and the importance of the resmolushuns though. It's all about the 'experience'. So I'm sure the general consumer will never know if it's more powerful or not. All Nintendo PR so far had said that it's on par with the current HD systems.
AceBandage said:
The Wii's DVD slot loader actually cost about $31 at launch, since it was mini and normal for a slot loader I believe it was the first of it's kind, and blu-ray roms are much cheaper now, with Nintendo's lack of royality payments too, I would say the price is negated.
AceBandage said:
I think this would certainly be much higher than the ~$13 Wii CPU, I'd guess $40-80
AceBandage said:
I think it will be cheaper than the CPU, maybe $30-60 which should put them @ HD4730-4850
AceBandage said:
Yes, controller will cost $50-70 easily, LCD would cost $30-40 + wireless and controls for $60-70 total.
Other components would cost maybe $100+$40(what Wii's extra costs totaled) for the final price.
System to build would cost: ~$260-$350 = Nintendo sold Wii at an estimated $50 profit at launch, so $299 for the low price, and $399 for the high price. I doubt they would go full high end, as $399 seems to miss their target, and Reggie has already said that the price would be competitive (from a value perspective) to current HD twins. Meaning they won't be priced outside the market, and I would argue anything over $350 is beyond that price.
AceBandage
Banned
Coolwhip said:
The general population won't be able to tell the difference between BF3 on the PS3 and the PC, though.
And despite the fact that it's easily recognizable to you and me, they just don't see it until you point it out.
The Wii U will be powerful enough, regardless of actual specs.
Beyond that, it's all up to the software to move the thing.
bgassassin said:
No I saw the "maybe" in your post, which is why I asked =p I'll admit that I did miss the wild card comment.
bgassassin said:
By normalcy, do you mean one dominant console while the other two have a noticeably lesser install base or are you talking about system performance where one is clearly head and shoulders above the competition?
I liked how close this gen was in both sales and performance.
specialguy
Banned
AceBandage said:
Nah, it is never about software, it is always about hardware.
Mock and laugh, but at some level I speak the truth.
Look at this thread, 80% of the people here hope desperately the Wii U has good hardware chops. Desperately.
I see you didn't bother to read the engadget link I posted giving estimated price of the console to build, it was 158 for internals and 196 after everything else was taken into consideration. Wii sold for 249.99 at launch, which meant $54 estimated profit per unit.Mr_Brit said:
No, the controller is not going cost $70 to to make. A lot of the components in that controller will be similar to what's in the $6 Wii Remote Plus. It'll be $30-50, I'm positive.z0m3le said:
And Nintendo isn't going to spend more than $250 altogether. If the costs are over $300, it'll cost $400, which will cause an immediate flop.
AceBandage said:
Yes I agree with that except the last part. What actually moves millions of consoles is hard for us to say. You need extensive market research for that. I'm pretty curious what the results would be if you asked the 100 ish million PS360 owners why they bought the system.
ii Stryker
Banned
KageMaru said:
wat? Not for Nintendo it wasn't. =/
BurntPork said:
LCD screen should cost $40(touch), battery is going to cost you at least $5(likely $10), the wireless is going to cost you at least $10 but the tech is pretty advanced not to have noticeable lag(expect $15), the controller parts are going to cost you maybe $8...
That's $63-$73...
As for the estimation I gave, Wii cost $196 to make, Wii U will cost more (Iwata said as much) so yeah $260 is well within that ball park, and I said $350 for cost to manufacture is the absolute limit. I agree with you $400 is too high for mainstream, but Gamers will pay 400 for a new console, though more Gamers will pay $350 for that same console, and Nintendo really should be placing this at the best pricing it can, $299 for a $260 to build console, would be the best business decision they could make.
I expect a $349 console as 360 kentec sold extremely well at that price.
"In the GameCube business, industry specialists estimate the company will lose 5,000-10,000 ($41 to $83) yen per console, each carrying a 25,000 yen ($208.3) price tag in Japan and $199 in the US, at least for the first year."
-I knew it sold at a loss, I didn't think it was a ~$50 one, in 2011 that translates to over $300 cost to manufacture.
$260(lowest)-$350(highest) for Wii U's cost to build is a pretty fair estimate, leaving Nintendo $40-50 Profit. I don't see why GAF believes Nintendo can't do this, or why it wouldn't be a smart business decision, we KNOW Nintendo isn't taking a Wii approach with this new system, as it is modern.
Nintendo also wants longer legs on Wii U than Wii, so making it comparable to, but weaker than PS4 is the best method for that. I just don't understand GAF's thought process here... It's almost like GAF refuses to believe that Nintendo is even releasing a console that is a step above PS360.
-I knew it sold at a loss, I didn't think it was a ~$50 one, in 2011 that translates to over $300 cost to manufacture.
$260(lowest)-$350(highest) for Wii U's cost to build is a pretty fair estimate, leaving Nintendo $40-50 Profit. I don't see why GAF believes Nintendo can't do this, or why it wouldn't be a smart business decision, we KNOW Nintendo isn't taking a Wii approach with this new system, as it is modern.
Nintendo also wants longer legs on Wii U than Wii, so making it comparable to, but weaker than PS4 is the best method for that. I just don't understand GAF's thought process here... It's almost like GAF refuses to believe that Nintendo is even releasing a console that is a step above PS360.
ii Stryker
Banned
specialguy said:
The visual disparity between the WiiU and ps4/xbox3 will be far less noticeable then the disparity between the Wii and ps360.
Gameplay matters more then gfx, wii has already established that.
Mr_Brit said:
http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/15/w...p-to-just-158/ post #1266
that is where the Wii's cost to manufacture came from. Read the post, it says that the components cost ~158 with the rest of the console's expenses costing ~$40 more to build.
Also Gamecube sold at a ~$50 loss at launch. It quickly came down after the first year, but Wii U sitting anywhere between $260 and $350 to build makes sense. It really depends on if they are willing to break even or not, because I seriously doubt the price will be over $350, but I never would of thought 3DS would sell @ $250.
I HIGHLY doubt the the screen with cost that much. Touchscreens are dirt-cheap these days. The 3DS's two screens cost under $30 total, so I would expect the screen to be $20-30. I seen no reason why it would be $40. However, I'll admit that I forget the battery, so I'll revise to $40-55.z0m3le said:
BurntPork said:
Could you break down the $40 version into components? I'm still trying to figure out how you put a $30 6.2inch touch screen (which I would imagine is the lowest price you could go) plus $10 for battery, wiimote+ that cost $6, plus other controller components and instant lag free wireless for basically free... I could imagine maybe $53 being the lowest... but i could easily see that growing to $70, just based on low balling all the components prices.
Fine, $40 might be unrealistic, but $70 is just INSANE. If it costs above $55 just to make, someone at Nintendo needs to be fired. That would, yet again, be suicide as far as third-party support goes because that would either cut into everything or raise the price of the console drastically.z0m3le said:
Could you at least find a figure supporting the screen costing $40? Adding touch to the screen probably costs less than a dollar now, not $10-15 as you imply.
Take a look at this:
Your $5 estimate for the battery is probably correct. $10 isn't likely at all.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
On Wii U you have at least 4x the screen area as a single 3DS lcd, and screen costs go up as you require larger unbroken unflawed LCD panels.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
I don't doubt that whatever it costs, they will still make money off the tablet controllers. It costs like 100 AUD to get a full Nunchuck set, I don't even want to think about what they will charge for a replacement tablet controller. I know they're making a stupid markup, but you'd think that they would have to increase the cost, just as a perceived value thing.
1 6.2" screen would be more than the price of 4 smaller ones. Take a slab of LCD, even if you have a small defect in one area, you can still cut out 3.5" screens from the rest of it. With a larger screen you're more likely to hit a defect so you'll get less yield compared to smaller screens.
It also would be affected based on standard sizes. 3.5" is a fairly standard size. 6.2" with 800x 480 (or whatever) isn't that standard a size. Anything non-standard will cost more.
It also would be affected based on standard sizes. 3.5" is a fairly standard size. 6.2" with 800x 480 (or whatever) isn't that standard a size. Anything non-standard will cost more.
The DSi estimates are from 2009, though, and the difference likely isn't more than a couple dollars.mrklaw said:
If the price of the screen alone is $40, then the controller will, without a doubt, cost $100 if it's sold at retail. Even Nintendo can't be retarded enough to... wait. Damn. Well, second controller definitely won't happen.
mrklaw said:
Yeah, I was trying to hit the bottom end price, so I didn't even want to talk about defects, the controller is likely to cost what I said, $60-$70. Nintendo will sell it at a profit if they sell it at all, I think they are waiting for the price to manufacture to go down a bit, and also I think they are afraid people will buy the Wii U pad for their Wii's and not understand that it is a new console.
Still hopefully they do it anyways, I'd gladly pay $100 for a 2nd controller for multi-local player with that 4swords/ffcc style of game play.
BurntPork said:
While the style is similar, you can't really compare a Wii U pad to a GBA, the biggest problem with setting up one of those games was the cable, not the GBAs, lots of people who owned a GameCube owned a GBA, I'd imagine the percentage of GCN owners that owned a GBA was much higher than people made it out to be, heck I think I owned 2 at the time, and I was 18 in 2003. Wii U pad local multiplayer would be at a much higher adoption rate.
The price of a GBA + the cable was less than $100, though, and yet those games still flopped. Why would this be very different?z0m3le said:
God, I hate Nintendo. They really need to learn something this gen. Perhaps both 3DS and Wii U selling less than the N64 will teach them to stop using expensive gimmicks...
The difference is the cable. Many people had a GC and a GBA. But the act of bying a 15 cable for just adding multiplayer feature to a bunch of game really needs an incentive.BurntPork said:
Plus, imagine you had a GC, and a GBA. Your friend only have a GBA. No way you will buy him a cable, no way he will buy a cable for playing with you.
With Wii U and 3DS, you only need to own the systems. Of course it is more expensive, but there is no need for an extra act of buying something that seems useless.
Your friend/bro have a 3DS, he joins you in your game. End of story.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
AceBandage said:
This is Nintendo. It's totally not unusual for them to have a blockbuster game, then not a direct followup for 4+ years.Game-Biz said:
Shin Johnpv
Member
Coolwhip said:
No, no its not. It's software. It always has been and always will be software that moves systems.
- Status