Wii U Speculation Thread of Brains Beware: Wii U Re-Unveiling At E3 2012
- Thread starter bgassassin
- Start date
- Status
Pancakes R Us
Member
I doubt that very much.TAS said:
LegendofJoe
Member
Pancakes R Us said:
I do too and it's unfortunate. I wouldn't mind it if I believed the power gap wouldn't negatively affect software support, but the truth is it will.
manueldelalas
Time Traveler
1&2. Truthrhoq said:
3. Lucky? Really? WTF are you smoking? Nobody wants to buy one? This is why juniors have bad reputation on GAF; back your claims with some data. The Wii was a huge risk for Nintendo, a bigger risk than any other console maker had taken before... lucky, yeah right. If Wii U was a normal step from the Wii, it would use 2005 hardware, not 2012 hardware, there is a big difference.
4. So, what's the big leap you are speaking about? Why you take rumors that say one thing and discard other rumors (which are equally as credible) that say another thing, that only turns you into a console warrior (why do you do this?, what do you gain?).
In the end, we know absolutely nothing about any of next gens consoles, except the controller of the WiiU (which I love, it even has an HDMI output =P).
TAS said:
Xbox had a 3.5 hdd (not small), a full pc optical drive unit (very big) and gamecube lack both of this things ... the optical drive is manual and only for mini-discs ...
If you remove the hdd, the pc optical drive and put a mini disc manual drive you think xbox1 will be 3/4 bigger than gc?
Please be serious ...
Besides, the problem here is the heat that you have to cool in a small "box" that now is Wii U, more power more heat, no surprises.
/offtopic off
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
You're welcome.lherre said:
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
One of the loop 'rumors' is actually a rumor. The other is a prank. About the credence of which one are you asking about? The one that quotes as the cpu an IBM server rig?KrawlMan said:
manueldelalas said:
Lucky? Yes. As you said, they took a huge risk with the Wii. They bet everything on the WiiMote and it was very lucky for them that it paid off. The Wii is now at the end of it's life cycle, sales have cooled down and yes, pretty much everybody who wanted a Wii already has (or had) one. Nintendo wouldn't be falling short of their forecasts if people were still lining up to get the must-have Wii. Sure some of it can be blamed on the weaker-than-expected 3DS sales, but you can't blame it all on the 3DS.
Forsaken82
Member
TAS said:
I don't think it will be that close, but I also think it will be close enough to keep up with the other systems multiplats. At worst I see a Dreamcast < Xbox difference... AT WORST.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
No, they contained ICs that were made on entirely different fab processes. That allows for increasing the level of integration in the ICs and often decreasing the physical number of chips (things which were 2 chips before could now be 1), the dropping of voltages of the ICs allows for optimisations in the PCB powerails design, the dropping of wattages allows for reduction in heatspreaders and their footprints on the PCB. BTW, the notion that a console vendor would not care about the size of their motherboard is just wrong.lherre said:
;pAzaK said:
Dreamwriter
Member
It was never planned to be a Gamecube add-on. True, Nintendo experimented with motion controls on the Gamecube, but that was before its release, just like they experimented with stereoscopic 3D on the Gamecube before its launch, but the 3DS wasn't originally a Wii add-on. At that time the motion sensors that were consumer-priced were too expensive and had too much lag to be usable, so the motion-controls were put on hold.rhoq said:
The Wii's low power was a result of Nintendo's decision to release a game system far cheaper than the competition, and the thinking that developers already knew how to program for the Gamecube so compared to the competition the development costs would be way low.
Rumors say the Wii-U has enough power to produce the highest quality PS3 and XBox 360 graphics, but at 1080p at 60fps. Which is plenty of power, because it costs HUGE development costs to make art even as detailed as the "lowly" XBox 360/PS3 can do. I mean think about it, why doesn't every game on PS3/360 look like Uncharted or Gears of War? Because those games cost a lot of money to develop. So think, if the next-gen consoles are capable of way higher quality graphics, most games will still look like they do now, because most developers aren't willing to put over $10 million into every game they make.rhoq said:
So as long as the Wii-U can handle the best the PS3/360 can do but at 1080p/60fps, it will be graphically competitive for all but the biggest games.
And we'll have Donkey Kong with Uncharted graphics, Metroid looking like Gears of War.
FreeMufasa
Junior Member
Dreamwriter said:
This is something i've been trying to say. A lot of people think that as soon as the new hardware rolls around, most games will be far above Uncharted. Very few devs will be able to match that and even fewer will be able to surpass it. Last gen was the last time where hardware was the constraint. It's all going to be because of money now.
So what do we know about the devkits so far? I think I've lost track from the number of people screaming "Nintendo is doomed because XboxLoop or whatever has way more power its GC to Wii again" in this thread.
lherre said at least 1GB RAM. What about other stuff? What happened about the report of two tablets? I thought the source was actually from an interview that was months old.
lherre said at least 1GB RAM. What about other stuff? What happened about the report of two tablets? I thought the source was actually from an interview that was months old.
lherre is trying hard to keep our expectations at bay because he already knows that it'll be a Wii-level affair. I think we should just listen and focus this thread on seeing Nintendo games in HD and the possibilities of the controller. The truth is, I'll be shocked if Wii U ever gets a game that looks better than Uncharted 3.sfried said:
That mentality will keep you sane once E3 comes around and we're all disappointed when Nintendo shows current-gen graphics a mere 24 hours after XB3 shows the best graphics we've ever seen.
rhoq said:
They said, "Hey guys... maybe we ought to make a system that takes away all the obstacles of playing video games and allows families to play them together?" In retrospect, it should've been considered the biggest "Yeah, no shit" moment in video game history. Because that's what the Wii did, and it is THE reason for its massive success. It's also the reason for Kinect's subsequent success.
On its face, it seems pretty rational, no?
So I'm not sure how 'lucky' I consider it. They just put thought into what the larger audience wants from games and what the industry was offering them (and, largely, continues to offer them).
EDIT: You people and your damn Uncharted 3 graphics. I'll be pleased if Nintendo makes more ArtStyle games, graphics be damned. Hell, just imagining what it could do with that controller on that line of games is mesmerizing.
...Shanadeus said:
Fucking shit. You for get one word, and it changes everything! I meant to throw "undeniably" in there. As in, there will be debates over it, just like there are debates that *insert XBox game here* looks way better than Super Mario Galaxy or *insert PSP game here* looks better than RE:R. In other words, the jump from PS3 to Wii U will be so negligible that some will wonder why Nintendo even bothered.
BurntPork said:
You know, if you just take the specs that we "know" about, The Wii U sounds like it outperforms the PS3 by a damn good margin, using a base GPU that came out 4 years after the PS3's and twice the total RAM. Which is to say, you're off your rocker and probably need to take your meds and/or calm the hell down.
Dimishing returns ruins that. In term of raw power, it'll be 50% faster than PS3, just like that rumor from around E3 said. For the most part, we'll probably just get PS3-level games with better textures and more stable frame rates, but still 720p or lower for most games.Deguello said:
BurntPork said:
Diminishing Returns also means it'll be hard for your average consumer to tell the difference between a GPU from 1 year ago from a GPU from 2 years ago. Diminishing Returns also means there will be no appreciable gap between generations unless consoles cost $600 again.
Did you forget "undeniably" here too, or is this topic open for discussion as well?
cartman414
Member
To play devil's advocate... would it be feasible to go with one of AMD's upcoming 7000 series GPUs on the basis of being lower wattage?
If Nintendo were going all out, you'd have a point. However, a braindead monkey could tell the difference between an RV730 and a 6970-level GPU.Deguello said:
Not a chance. Nintendo won't be going 28nm. It would just be a waste of money unless they go for 3-4x the amount of power hinted at being in this, and would probably have 1.5-2GB of RAM if they were.cartman414 said:
If they bother you that much, here you go.methodman said:
ShockingAlberto
Member
The angsty teenage approach.BurntPork said:
Quick, tell him he's not your real dad.
Gravijah said:
Burntpork.
Also, didn't bgassassin say a southern islands GPU wouldn't be that far fetched, suggesting something like the Lombok card in the final units?
How big a difference will this be compared to the current specced specs we have now?
Not too familiar with these 7000 series cards.
Also, read that they were delayed to Q1 2012... would fall in line with Wii U final unveling at E3 and also explain mixed devcomments, as they possibly know what's to come but are a little dissatisfied at the moment?
- Status