Gamer @ Heart
Member
If hollywood and broadway chips are in the system for straight BC, where would they sit next to all the other stuff in the SoC?
Wii U Speculation Thread of Brains Beware: Wii U Re-Unveiling At E3 2012
- Thread starter bgassassin
- Start date
- Status
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Wii REVENGEANCE could be the new name imo.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
Will?
Both of these have already happened.
The problem is that physical media is far too expensive to produce for consoles. And it can't be made in the enormous quantities that discs can.
I mean, just take RE:R on the 3DS for example.
A 4GB card is forcing Capcom to raise the price on the game as it is.
Can you imagine trying to do that with a 32 or 60GB card?
Insanity.
And no, you can't use SD cards. They aren't the same thing and aren't as fast or as stable as specialty made products like the 3DS and Vita cards.
Yeah I understand it would obviously be some sort of proprietary flash, and be monstrously more expensive. But that's why it needs to become a standard. Something format-wise Nintendo could champion, like Blu-Ray for Sony. It would at least give Nintendo (if successful) another revenue stream other than gaming, as well as improve customer product reliability. If we had the mentality we do toward optical media in the early 90's we'd still be using 3.5 floppies...
But I agree, way too expensive right now.
AceBandage
Banned
For that to work, they'd have to get over a dozen companies to support the media (including SONY) well before the system came out. And let's face it. That's not Nintendo, and the world isn't exactly screaming for something to replace SD cards.
Not saying it wouldn't be awesome, but it's just not gonna happen.
Honestly, we'll jump from BluRays straight to all digital downloads, with no awesome high-capacity physical media like Holographic Storage.
I think it will be in the ballpark of those consoles. They're NOT going to go with the same type of jump and try a "$599" moment. It wouldn't shock me if each company took only a very small loss early on compared to previous consoles.
Um. Nintendo needs to court 3rd parties, not scare them off. Cartridge media is stupid-expensive (per GB), and the main reason developers fled to PlayStation. Ultimately, digital distribution would be the most appropriate business model for Nintendo: 3rd parties get low publishing costs, scalable pricing, and easy entry, while Nintendo gets a heavier hand in quality control, and can bypass retailers entirely.
...probably won't happen until Sony or Microsoft does it first, though.
...probably won't happen until Sony or Microsoft does it first, though.
AceBandage
Banned
That's what most of us think, but it's pretty impossible to tell, even still.
Sony and MS can be crazy sometimes.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
On the issue of bypassing retailers, and I totally agree DD the next step btw, but not anytime soon due to internet not being freely available not to mention the US internet backbone not stacking up. Otherwise we could stream or download everything we pay for for minimal time spent and low costs, right now it's just too divided on caps/ISP/throttling to an extent/and general instability considering the needed consistency of the service we're talking about.
But let's assume we went totally DD with little issues on availability, consistency and costs. Could that potentially (assuming it's a successful "mass business model" replacement) allow for the entry of AO games on mainstream consoles? Super edgy content that wouldn't be on the shelf at Walmart or Gamestop, which dissuades the production of AO in the first place...anybody think it might be a bit more likely to see that if it were all-of-a-sudden profitable and "allowed on X or Y consoles"?
But let's assume we went totally DD with little issues on availability, consistency and costs. Could that potentially (assuming it's a successful "mass business model" replacement) allow for the entry of AO games on mainstream consoles? Super edgy content that wouldn't be on the shelf at Walmart or Gamestop, which dissuades the production of AO in the first place...anybody think it might be a bit more likely to see that if it were all-of-a-sudden profitable and "allowed on X or Y consoles"?
Why do they need to be first? Nintendo is a company that often cuts deals so developers can have low entry access. The big issue is distribution and market awareness: They need to advertise their DD more.
Probably not. I doubt any console-based DD service would allow content racy enough to get an AO rating...at least, not until it's proven to be successful and viable on PC first.
Fourth Storm
Member
Bah...time for my specs prediction again. I believe. Mark my effin words...
CPU: 3.6Ghz Trid- core custom IBM Power7 derivative on 45 nm process. 2-way SMT. 3 MB total eDRAM
GPU: 600 Mhz AMD Radeon custom GPU. Close to RV770 LE but on 28nm. 640 spus. 32 MB eDRAM/1t-SRAM (somewhat interchangeable based on performance perhaps)
System RAM: 1.5GB-2GB GDDR5
Don't be fooled by the small case. Remember the Gamecube...
CPU: 3.6Ghz Trid- core custom IBM Power7 derivative on 45 nm process. 2-way SMT. 3 MB total eDRAM
GPU: 600 Mhz AMD Radeon custom GPU. Close to RV770 LE but on 28nm. 640 spus. 32 MB eDRAM/1t-SRAM (somewhat interchangeable based on performance perhaps)
System RAM: 1.5GB-2GB GDDR5
Don't be fooled by the small case. Remember the Gamecube...
Dreamwriter
Member
The problem is, Digital Distribution just isn't a good business model yet. XBLA, PSN, Wiiware/VC and DSiWare, none of them make much money at all through downloads. Us hardcore gamers can love DD, but the average gamer never downloads a single app/DLC. Most people who bought Rock Band, for example, only played the songs included on the game disc.
First of all, there are a lot of things about the GameCube that can't be replicated in a modern console. (And even if they could, I'm pretty sure that Wii U is actually even smaller than the GCN.)
Second, it's either RV740 with GDDR5, or RV770(LE) with GDDR3. No chance in hell of Wii U having 256-bit GDDR5.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
Yeah the great hardware design of the Gamecube was from a completely different era of architecture. Just taking compact dimensions into account because their both small and powerful doesn't tell the whole story. The heat differences and thermal demands from the parts as well as reliability are completely different beasts when we're talking high clocked multi-core stuff.
I don't even think the technical engineers who designed the GC still work there, or do they? After all the Wii wasn't Nintendo's best designed system and they didn't even push any boundaries. Honestly Nintendo's quality control since the DS Lite has been steadily getting worse...
I don't even think the technical engineers who designed the GC still work there, or do they? After all the Wii wasn't Nintendo's best designed system and they didn't even push any boundaries. Honestly Nintendo's quality control since the DS Lite has been steadily getting worse...
POWER7, unlike Broadway, has an excellent embedded DDR3 memory controller. It most likely makes far more sense to use that and completely rip the memory controller from the GPU. It not only won't be GDDR5, it most likely won't be GDDR at all.
bgassassin
Member
I'm still concerned about that resulting in high latency.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
Sorry if you guy's have already discussed this, but I'm not going back through 100 pages of reading. But realistically, what kind of costs do you think we'll see from the streaming stuff? Will it all be on the GPU, will there be anything dedicated, and how will any real performance cost translate to third-party games?
bgassassin
Member
Well the patent showed there were hardware codecs in both the console and controller. Then there is the dedicated chip for I/O. So I don't see the stream itself being a burden on the CPU or GPU.
I can't answer the last question.
Are you concerned about the cost for the actual streaming to the controller or the cost of running a second screen? At this point, we don't really know for either. If its the former, there a handful of different technologies that could be used, each with their own pros and cons that may effect performance. If its the latter, that will largely depend on what they do with the second screen. I think I remember talk way, way back that the GPU was designed for multiple outputs ... but I don't remember fully, it could have been just speculation.
The dimensions of the outer casings for both systems are 128.5 cu.in for the WiiU and 159.8 cu.in for the GCN. However, the Gamecube wastes about 50 cubic inches of hallow plastic for the attachment cut-outs on the bottom of the unit and a recess for the lid on top. We can't compare internal components yet, but one thing is for certain, the WiiU will have significantly more surface area to work with.
Really? For those specs in 2006, what would have Nintendo charged? $ 249?
If they knew Wii was going to have a short lifespan, why wait till 2012 to launch WiiU?
They could have launched it last year, when the Wii brand was stronger, hyped it the year before and would have been in a position to offer a system that could play the current crop of cross platform titles and still be as affordable as the Wii.
Yes maybe the tab controller would not have been affordable, but what Nintendo could have done is come out with a WiiMotion Plus System supporting HD at the original Wii price. And drop the other console down by $100.
This WiiHD with Motion Plus, could extend the Wii brand four to five years. We could have had Skyward Sword in HD.
Or... is the WiiU in a better position?
Considering Sony was going to charge 600$ for a 256MB system, Nintendo would have had probably gone with around 300$ at most. But they're also a company that doesn't like to release 500$ consoles.
Short lifespan? It's been the normal 5-6 year console cycle run so far for the Wii.
Persuing third party ports that ran on the other systems (and already had people buying it for those systems) would have been poor business management and they would have been stuck in "mid-cycle console" for the generation afterwards. They're not Sega. Each time a new generation begins is when all the playerbases shift. Peter Main said this while working for Nintendo, and it still rings true. Halfway through a console cycle is not the time to Osborne your existing console and attempt to peel people off the other ones.
Actual HD or upscaling of existing games? Upscaling would have been just as achievable by releasing a dongle that plugs between the console and the A/V cable to do it. Actual more power would have led developers to make non-HD games that use the expanding VRAM to double buffer or do sub-HD HDR, meaning split console base. Also silly.
I think people should just let go of the "WiiHD" concept. HD would have added nothing to Skyward Sword's gameplay.
Have a think about why third parties don't support Wii. Have a think about why Nintendo would go for a tablet controller with the full array of buttons on other systems. Also have a think about would would change if Nintendo had merely upgraded Wii to be as powerful as current gen systems. I think you'll find the answer.
Pancakes R Us
Member
I think the really silly thing is thing is that Nintendo admits these things well after the fact. The company constantly does things its own way all the time, which of course often works for it. However, silly little things like lack of an account based system for online gaming etc. is just stupid.
Naked Prime
Member
Battalion Wars developed by Retro will have me there Day Ø. I really hope that Nintendo has a good launch window line-up.
fabricated backlash
Member
Well after seeing the "last of us" trailer I must say that I would be perfectly ok with Nintendo delivering just a half step over the PS3. (Asuming all the raving fan wet dreams in that thread are true and they really showed gameplay instead of cutscenes)
But I guess it just shows how clever engineers can push a hardware and given how Nintendo pushed the Wii with SMG1 and 2, Metroid Prime 3 and Xenoblade, I can't wait for their games to come out.
But I guess it just shows how clever engineers can push a hardware and given how Nintendo pushed the Wii with SMG1 and 2, Metroid Prime 3 and Xenoblade, I can't wait for their games to come out.
Yep. It was a critical error IMO.
Wii didn't 'not get core gamers'. A lot of us would have bought a Wii for Nintendo exclusives. But because of the lack of power, core gamers would buy multi platform games on one of the HD twins, so the Wii ends up being a first party platform only. If it had been even slightly close to the 360/PS3 it could have been a genuine 'one console' choice for many people.
I've never heard of the drive failing on a Gamecube. Mine has been 100% reliable for nearly ten years now. Along with a SNES and N64 which have never failed on me. I've had the lasers fail on two Dreamcasts though. And I've had one Xbox go RROD.
not sure about the tesselator. Are people suggesting that because they want it, or because its practical?
Current GPUs bog down with tessellation. Yes, I'm sure future programming will refine how its done and get more out of the tech, but that combined with the WiiU going with an older chip - I think its a stretch to think they'll customise to put tessellation in. They'll be happy with good performance in standard polygons in HD. They'll do amazing things with that anyway
Current GPUs bog down with tessellation. Yes, I'm sure future programming will refine how its done and get more out of the tech, but that combined with the WiiU going with an older chip - I think its a stretch to think they'll customise to put tessellation in. They'll be happy with good performance in standard polygons in HD. They'll do amazing things with that anyway
the androgyne
Member
Is it known now, that the Wii is literally not capable of 720p?
Or, was it just a 480p restriction they imposed somehow?
Right from the beginning i thought it was odd - simply because the original Xbox had a few 720p games... Wii is more powerful than that... right?
I don't know why they wouldn't let a developer do 720p at some other system cost.
Or, was it just a 480p restriction they imposed somehow?
Right from the beginning i thought it was odd - simply because the original Xbox had a few 720p games... Wii is more powerful than that... right?
I don't know why they wouldn't let a developer do 720p at some other system cost.
Not enough VRAM to double buffer in 720p
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Wii does not do double buffering in edram - the latter stores only the back buffer. The front buffer is in the 24MB 'mem1' pool.
The reason wii cannot do > 480p is because its video interface is limited to 480p.
When I mean short lifespan, I mean the decreasing support they received from third party developers. And the knowledge that a great gulf was increasing between the perceived value of the Wii and the HD twins as their prices decreased. Wii's value was already diminishing prior to the announcement of the new console.
I think this is a safe assertion.
I can definitely see these specs happening. Though I'm convinced it'll be 1.5GB of RAM.
AceBandage
Banned
Brain Stew's original 1.75GB seems more likely to me.
We shall see. Or, actually, we won't, but you know what I mean.
We shall see. Or, actually, we won't, but you know what I mean.
Shin Johnpv
Member
They don't have to customize to put tessellation in. It's already there, yes the one in the RV700 isn't as good as on newer chips (which is why people theorize they're going to update the one that's there in a custom chip) but it is already there. It would be impractical for them to actually remove tessellation completely from the system. I know we've had this conversation like 50 times and I'm pretty sure people have already replied to you with the exact same answer before.
Epic will put that game on every platform/device possible. But it won't be on WiiU, and it certainly won't be an exclusive!
AceBandage
Banned
Intentional.
I just can't see an Epic game hitting a Nintendo console.
I really hope I'm proved wrong, but I can only think that they'll come up with any excuse imaginable not to.
It'd be even worse if the game did arrive, but as a late port/without utilising the Upad.
/Burtnpork mode
stilgar said:
Ruddega and Daveyerina.
You realise you have to call them that now?
Fixed.
I think Nintendo's problem is that they actively distance themselves from the competition and third parties with both their games and marketing strategy. At the VGA's a bunch of multiplatform titles were announced, none are for Wii U. Since E3 not a single third party developer has given their support for the system. Now this might be an NDA that's into place but it's stupid because right now it looks like Wii U, much like the Wii, won't get all the games.
AceBandage
Banned
[Nintex];33369329 said:
Of course they're under NDA.
Even games we KNOW are hitting the system (like Darksiders 2) didn't have the Wii U logo on them.
Nintendo is keeping everything close to the chest until E3.
So they won't be at CES2012?
AceBandage
Banned
I doubt we'll see any Wii U news before E3, honestly.
Yep, and besides, WiiU isn't out yet, and hasn't even been fully revealed.
What you saw were exclusives for existing systems that have been in development for a long time prior (one from 2009).
Nintendo won't be showing any 3rd party games until they're absolutely certain people know about the system and what it's capable of.
Next years VGA? Sure.
*EDIT*
Nah, we'll get something before E3.
A leak announcement one day before 
In all seriousness though, I promise to each and every visitor of this thread that something will arise before E3. Repeating myself for the 65th time, February is likely for some new info. Though I can't tell you what it'll be... (That'd break my NDA).
- Status