Wii U Speculation Thread of Brains Beware: Wii U Re-Unveiling At E3 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
What Nintendo needs most is games. It doesn't matter if they have lack a GB in RAM or some teraflops in power compared to Mattrick's new box. What they need is at least one of their big franchises at launch. I'm starting to think we might actually get a new Mario title at launch this time. One of the EAD Tokyo games hasn't shown the fruits of their labor yet. If the price isn't outrageous than specs should be the least of Nintendo's problems.
 
You didn't answer my question Burntpork. What spec are you assuming for WiiU that makes you believe it'll only be 50% more powerful than PS3?
 
GDGF said:
I just really want to know more about the games now :)

Gonna be a long, hard wait.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's how I feel. I can rant and rave and speculate about the hardware all I'd like, but I'm going to be buying it regardless, so what matters most is the games. I figure Pikmin 3 will be one of if not Nintendo's 'big' game to show at E3 2012. Given it was in development for the Wii first, I'm hoping they spend plenty of time sprucing up the assets to make sure it looks like it made for the new hardware.

Otherwise I'm not sure what they'll have. New Super Mario Bros. Wii U will probably make an appearance if they've decided to turn it full game. Retro is probably working on the Wii U now, though I don't expect we'll hear anything from them for awhile. Monster Games I figure are on the Wii U, if not still on the 3DS.

Nintendo's two major Mario and Zelda teams just came off pretty big projects, so I suppose we wont see anything from them. Smash would be nice, but Project Sora is dedicated to the money sink that will be Kid Icarus.
 
TunaLover said:
@Ubermatik

We only can hope, but I prefer take the pessimistic approach, with the worst case scenario
Click to expand...

That isn't a worst case scenario, its an impossibility. We know that WiiU doesn't just match 360/PS3, when will people stop bothering to post this kind of thing?
 
Ubermatik 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?
Click to expand...
That was before the underpowered comment. If Nintendo were going that far, It wouldn't be called underpowered. The absolute best we'll get is Northern Islands' Turks.
 
TunaLover said:
It´s really stupid from Nintendo side launch a system that only can match current generation, thinking in getting current gen ports is short sighted, I wonder they didn´t think that PS4/720 are around the corner.

Why didn´t they consider next generation ports?
Click to expand...
There's a few possible reasons

A) Shit's expensive. They didn't want to release a $500+ system or take a massive loss on a $500+ system. Loss leader only works if you're the leader. If you're not the leader, you're kind of fucked.

B) Shit's expensive part II. Assuming the 720 and the PS4 are the graphical monsters they're rumored to be, the catfight between EA and Activision to see who can make the most expensive games bulges out to push everyone else out of the room. The Wii was partly Nintendo's weird attempt at helping third parties by offering a cheap, familiar place to make the same games they have been so game budgets did not balloon - or at least so there was a safe-haven from ballooning. Companies like THQ may not last the next calendar year at the rate they've been going and it's because the only games that really succeed anymore are either once-in-a-blue-moon niche titles with rabid fanbases and super-high budget games with marketing budgets that double the game development cost. So in Nintendo's mind, giving the developers the tools to make the games they've been making but without the need to got to 80 million+ development budgets.

But it's a vicious cycle, because the developers want to play that game because they think their game is going to make it. THQ genuinely assumed Homefront would be a massive success on the scale of Call of Duty or Battlefield instead of a moderate one. It wasn't. So publishers are going to want to keep making high-budget, high-marketed swill games on the off-chance that it will be the next big thing. Therein lies Nintendo's problem. You can't convince someone hooked on cocaine to spend way less on alcohol.

3) Shit's expensive part III. Nintendo themselves probably does not want to be developing super high budget games. The gap between PS4 development and Wii development is likely shockingly huge. When a Mario Kart game costs them $65 million to make, then it no longer has the same margins they want. Add in the fact that it does not look like the problems with the dollar and the euro will be fixed in the next four years and shit is expensive.

4) They probably didn't know where MS and Sony were going. If you asked me a year ago if they were going to pull the same "massive graphics bump" that they're apparently doing, I would have said you were crazy. But here we are.

5) The Gamecube, if nothing else, has proven that developers may port to Nintendo systems but they don't have to like it. One of my favorite stories back in the day was when I talked to the guy who ported Sands of Time to Gamecube. Yes, the guy. Ubisoft had one person port the entire game to the GC because they didn't want to dedicate a team to it. I see no reason the degree of quality for those ports will have changed.

6) Nintendo can be overly frugal at times.
 
BurntPork said:
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.
Click to expand...
Welp I guess I'm a brain dead monkey
 
EatChildren said:
Yeah, that's how I feel. I can rant and rave and speculate about the hardware all I'd like, but I'm going to be buying it regardless, so what matters most is the games. I figure Pikmin 3 will be one of if not Nintendo's 'big' game to show at E3 2012. Given it was in development for the Wii first, I'm hoping they spend plenty of time sprucing up the assets to make sure it looks like it made for the new hardware.

Otherwise I'm not sure what they'll have. New Super Mario Bros. Wii U will probably make an appearance if they've decided to turn it full game. Retro is probably working on the Wii U now, though I don't expect we'll hear anything from them for awhile. Monster Games I figure are on the Wii U, if not still on the 3DS.

Nintendo's two major Mario and Zelda teams just came off pretty big projects, so I suppose we wont see anything from them. Smash would be nice, but Project Sora is dedicated to the money sink that will be Kid Icarus.
Click to expand...
If I'm not mistaken some EAD Tokyo staff haven't shown up in credits since Super Mario Galaxy. I believe Miyamoto said 30 people worked on Super Mario 3D Land during the last 2 years. I imagine that if they put the entire studio behind it EAD Tokyo could deliver a next-gen Mario at Wii U launch.
 
BurntPork said:
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.

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.
Click to expand...

I can't facepalm hard enough...you're absolutely delusional
 
BurntPork said:
That was before the underpowered comment. If Nintendo were going that far, It wouldn't be called underpowered. The absolute best we'll get is Northern Islands' Turks.
Click to expand...

Underpowered means nothing at all specific, GameCube was described as underpowered compared to XBox.

Someone saying "Underpowered" should not make you think of a specific hardware. Because we have no real details on what its being compared to or anything specific to narrow down the exact meaning of the word in this instance. The fact that it does should set alarm bells off in your head that you're leaping to conclusions.
 
I said it many times before but I will say it again may be nintendo guy will see it. Please have wiimote and nunchuk in. they are amazing for control. Also I want this early lol
 
Games interest me the most as well. All the tech-talk gives me kind of a headache.

At this point I think Pikmin 3 is a given. I wouldn't be surprised if EAD Tokyo has something nifty @ launch.

Edit: damnit Nintex! :P
 
[Nintex] said:
If I'm not mistaken some EAD Tokyo staff haven't shown up in credits since Super Mario Galaxy. I believe Miyamoto said 30 people worked on Super Mario 3D Land during the last 2 years. I imagine that if they put the entire studio behind it EAD Tokyo could deliver a next-gen Mario at Wii U launch.
Click to expand...

Cool, I didn't know that. They'd definitely be on the Wii U then, no doubt working on a new Mario for hopefully the launch window.
 
Boney said:
Welp I guess I'm a brain dead monkey
Click to expand...

At least you don't believe that Microsoft will manage to bring a 300w GPU down enough in power to fit it in a 2012 console that'll use at most 150w total.

Or that WiiU will use a HD4650 despite every indication otherwise.
 
Donnie said:
At least you don't believe that Microsoft will manage to bring a 300w GPU down enough in power to fit it in a 2012 console that'll use at most 150w total.

Or that WiiU will use a HD4650 despite every indication otherwise.
Click to expand...
I said 6970, not 6990.

And there has been zero reliable indication otherwise.
 
ShockingAlberto said:
There's a few possible reasons

A) Shit's expensive. They didn't want to release a $500+ system or take a massive loss on a $500+ system. Loss leader only works if you're the leader. If you're not the leader, you're kind of fucked.

B) Shit's expensive part II. Assuming the 720 and the PS4 are the graphical monsters they're rumored to be, the catfight between EA and Activision to see who can make the most expensive games bulges out to push everyone else out of the room. The Wii was partly Nintendo's weird attempt at helping third parties by offering a cheap, familiar place to make the same games they have been so game budgets did not balloon - or at least so there was a safe-haven from ballooning. Companies like THQ may not last the next calendar year at the rate they've been going and it's because the only games that really succeed anymore are either once-in-a-blue-moon niche titles with rabid fanbases and super-high budget games with marketing budgets that double the game development cost. So in Nintendo's mind, giving the developers the tools to make the games they've been making but without the need to got to 80 million+ development budgets.

But it's a vicious cycle, because the developers want to play that game because they think their game is going to make it. THQ genuinely assumed Homefront would be a massive success on the scale of Call of Duty or Battlefield instead of a moderate one. It wasn't. So publishers are going to want to keep making high-budget, high-marketed swill games on the off-chance that it will be the next big thing. Therein lies Nintendo's problem. You can't convince someone hooked on cocaine to spend way less on alcohol.

3) Shit's expensive part III. Nintendo themselves probably does not want to be developing super high budget games. The gap between PS4 development and Wii development is likely shockingly huge. When a Mario Kart game costs them $65 million to make, then it no longer has the same margins they want. Add in the fact that it does not look like the problems with the dollar and the euro will be fixed in the next four years and shit is expensive.

4) They probably didn't know where MS and Sony were going. If you asked me a year ago if they were going to pull the same "massive graphics bump" that they're apparently doing, I would have said you were crazy. But here we are.

5) The Gamecube, if nothing else, has proven that developers may port to Nintendo systems but they don't have to like it. One of my favorite stories back in the day was when I talked to the guy who ported Sands of Time to Gamecube. Yes, the guy. Ubisoft had one person port the entire game to the GC because they didn't want to dedicate a team to it. I see no reason the degree of quality for those ports will have changed.

6) Nintendo can be overly frugal at times.
Click to expand...

This post combines just about every single thought I've had over the course of this generation in reference to the next one. Especially B. Bravo ShockingAlberto, and godspeed.
 
So wait, the Wii is underpowerd compared to Xbox360 and PS3 everyone is saying.

Shouldn't it be "The Wii has only less power than the Xbox360 and PS3" instead?

Because, "underpowered" implies that something has not enough power to produce something it was designed to. Like a sportcar that cant even run 100 miles or CAN'T compete with other sportscarts.

Now with the Wii, the term underpowered doesn make sense.

The Wii is definitely powerful enough to compete with the other consoles, and also definitely powerful enough for what the developers of the console had in mind with it - so to speak, the Wii has enough power for it's purpose.

The Wii has been powerful enough to take ALL the Nintendo's franchises to a next level. Super Mario Galaxy, Mario Kart, Zelda Skyward sword with it's 1:1 Sword gameplay.

NONE of those games, and also many other NOT half heartedly programmed thrid Party Titles do look very good. So where the fuck is the problem?

The Wii cant render the same amount of poligons and fancy shaders and what not than PS360, therefore didn't get many ports of those games, BUT that wasn't even neccessary to become a VERY PROFITABLE product with still a TON of good games, and if people, especially ppl who call themselves gamers aren't able to recognize that, because they have the misconseption that evey game has to look as realistic as Skyrim or Call of Duty, then they are just pathetic graphic whores who don't know that a games beauty is not measured by sheer hardware power but rather by the artistic fidelity of developers who create those graphics (or comonly known as "art direction").

Skyward Sword does look very nice, because developers knew their hardware and used it proberly. They MADE it nice looking!

So this stupid nonsense about the Wii being "underpowerd" should stop! If Nintendos EAD department wasn't able to fullfill their vision of a Zelda game with 1:1 Swordplay/Motionplay - something the WHOLE CONCEPT of the goddamn WII is and always has been about - THEN you could say "oh fuck, I think the Wii and its components are underpowerd".

So many things I have played this gen on Wii have CLEARLY been quite a step forword compared to last gen when it comes to gameplay and fun.

So stop saying the Wii is "underpowerd".
 
ShockingAlberto said:
There's a few possible reasons

A) Shit's expensive. They didn't want to release a $500+ system or take a massive loss on a $500+ system. Loss leader only works if you're the leader. If you're not the leader, you're kind of fucked.

B) Shit's expensive part II. Assuming the 720 and the PS4 are the graphical monsters they're rumored to be, the catfight between EA and Activision to see who can make the most expensive games bulges out to push everyone else out of the room. The Wii was partly Nintendo's weird attempt at helping third parties by offering a cheap, familiar place to make the same games they have been so game budgets did not balloon - or at least so there was a safe-haven from ballooning. Companies like THQ may not last the next calendar year at the rate they've been going and it's because the only games that really succeed anymore are either once-in-a-blue-moon niche titles with rabid fanbases and super-high budget games with marketing budgets that double the game development cost. So in Nintendo's mind, giving the developers the tools to make the games they've been making but without the need to got to 80 million+ development budgets.

But it's a vicious cycle, because the developers want to play that game because they think their game is going to make it. THQ genuinely assumed Homefront would be a massive success on the scale of Call of Duty or Battlefield instead of a moderate one. It wasn't. So publishers are going to want to keep making high-budget, high-marketed swill games on the off-chance that it will be the next big thing. Therein lies Nintendo's problem. You can't convince someone hooked on cocaine to spend way less on alcohol.

3) Shit's expensive part III. Nintendo themselves probably does not want to be developing super high budget games. The gap between PS4 development and Wii development is likely shockingly huge. When a Mario Kart game costs them $65 million to make, then it no longer has the same margins they want. Add in the fact that it does not look like the problems with the dollar and the euro will be fixed in the next four years and shit is expensive.

4) They probably didn't know where MS and Sony were going. If you asked me a year ago if they were going to pull the same "massive graphics bump" that they're apparently doing, I would have said you were crazy. But here we are.

5) The Gamecube, if nothing else, has proven that developers may port to Nintendo systems but they don't have to like it. One of my favorite stories back in the day was when I talked to the guy who ported Sands of Time to Gamecube. Yes, the guy. Ubisoft had one person port the entire game to the GC because they didn't want to dedicate a team to it. I see no reason the degree of quality for those ports will have changed.

6) Nintendo can be overly frugal at times.
Click to expand...
... And we're seeing that again with Darksiders II.
 
The only way I see Nintendo being great next gen is if they have their online right..not sure how to define that right now but thats all I can say really..they need some kind of fully fleshed out mmorpg pokemon or animal crossing(more preferably pokemon) that can take next gen away and become the next "cod"
 
Mihael Mello Keehl said:
The only way I see Nintendo being great next gen is if they have their online right..not sure how to define that right now but thats all I can say really..they need some kind of fully fleshed out mmorpg pokemon or animal crossing(more preferably pokemon) that can take next gen away and become the next "cod"
Click to expand...
I dunno. The "next big thing" could be an online multiplayer game or it could not be. CoD was, WoW was, Pokemon wasn't (at it's core), GTA wasn't, Angry Birds wasn't, Mario Kart focused on local, NSMB was a hybrid of local and single-player.

I don't think it's just as simple as saying "Pokemon MMORPG! GENERATION OVER." I guess we'll see how the world reacts to DQX first.
 
Zoramon089 said:
Seeing what? It's getting a full team and they sound pretty enthusiastic about it, considering they were once of the earliest devs to get dev kits
Click to expand...
Huh? I'm pretty sure that it's only two people.
 
ShockingAlberto said:
I dunno. The "next big thing" could be an online multiplayer game or it could not be. CoD was, WoW was, Pokemon wasn't (at it's core), GTA wasn't, Angry Birds wasn't, Mario Kart focused on local, NSMB was a hybrid of local and single-player.

I don't think it's just as simple as saying "Pokemon MMORPG! GENERATION OVER." I guess we'll see how the world reacts to DQX first.
Click to expand...
Thats the thing it needs to be something like pokemon, for japan yea its cool but really in the US I dont think DQ will have the same impact if it was pokemon instead.
 
Instro said:
I don't really see the point of arguing semantics, either way the system is/was not as powerful as people wanted it to be.
Click to expand...

But that goes for EVERY consoel ever made! Since the very first consoles, developers were crying for more power and power. It never stopped.

That's just natural. They want more. But instead of crying, they should just focus on what they have and show how good they are, which many developers in the history of console gaming have succeded in.

That are the developers that I respect the most. Not the one who want to have a great result with very little effort, like all those shitty jumping on the bandwagon noname studions, who develop the 10th "pat my little pony" shit.

Take Factor 5 for example. They wanted to make an awesome Star Wars flying game - and they succeed marvelously on Gamecube. People to this date are still in awe about what they have achieve on that machine. So that means, it was CAPABLE and powerful enough to fullfill their vision and please the viewers eyes.

Let's take Skyward Sword as an example again. You have 1:1 Sword movement, the grapics are nice, you can swith into the first person perspective whenever you want and even walk while doing it, just like that.

The hardware of the Wii has never changed. Something like that was also possible 2 or 3 years ago. So why so late?

And where the fuck is the awesome Starwars game everyone was expecting on the Wii???? Plz dont tell me that it wasn't possible to achive that because the Wii is "underpowerd". If Lucasarts just did a game similar to Skyward Sword and New Jedi Night or somehing, that would have been a hell of a Star Wars game. But why didnt they do it. Because maybe they don't know how, are not willing to take risks on the Wii. Certainly not because it wasn't "possible" on the Wii.
 
MDX said:
Why do people keep saying the Wii was underpowered?
It was a normal step up from the last generation.
What do you expect for a $250 console? It was designed to last
five years.
Click to expand...
1311379042454.gif


In order:

  • Because it was and prevented the Wii from getting all the big third party games a market leader gets?
  • It wasn't
  • The Gamecube cost $200 and it was fine
  • It was designed to be cheap to produce and get them profits from day one
 
Globox_82 said:
Wii U will be one of the biggest flops in video gaming history. Especially if MS unveils their next box.
Click to expand...

So you think it'll be a flop even if MS doesn't release their next console soon?
 
Zoramon089 said:
Where was that said?
Click to expand...
That interview when they were talking about how it only took five weeks to port the game and two lines of code to get streaming going. I'm 99% sure that the two people who were interviewed were the only ones working on the port.
 
BurntPork said:
That interview when they were talking about how it only took five weeks to port the game and two lines of code to get streaming going. I'm 99% sure that the two people who were interviewed were the only ones working on the port.
Click to expand...

That's a pretty extreme jump to conclusions...what interview involves every member of the dev team?
 
ShockingAlberto said:
5) The Gamecube, if nothing else, has proven that developers may port to Nintendo systems but they don't have to like it. One of my favorite stories back in the day was when I talked to the guy who ported Sands of Time to Gamecube. Yes, the guy. Ubisoft had one person port the entire game to the GC because they didn't want to dedicate a team to it. I see no reason the degree of quality for those ports will have changed.
Click to expand...
I don't know whether I should laugh, cry, or go full nerdrage...

I agree with the rest.
 
Zoramon089 said:
That's a pretty extreme jump to conclusions...what interview involves every member of the dev team?
Click to expand...
I though Cliffy B made Gears of War on his own and David Jaffe single-handily made Twisted Metal on PS3.
 
BurntPork said:
That interview when they were talking about how it only took five weeks to port the game and two lines of code to get streaming going. I'm 99% sure that the two people who were interviewed were the only ones working on the port.
Click to expand...
You won't fault anyone for questioning your intuition will you?

I'm 99% sure you're wrong on just about everything you've posted today.
 
Zoramon089 said:
That's a pretty extreme jump to conclusions...what interview involves every member of the dev team?
Click to expand...
I'm almost positive that was explicitly said. I'm not just assuming.

Thunder Monkey said:
You won't fault anyone for questioning your intuition will you?

I'm 99% sure you're wrong on just about everything you've posted today.
Click to expand...
You have figs in your rectum.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Switch 2 upgrades look worse than Wii U emulation upscaling
2 3 4
198
10K
nkarafo replied
The Switch 2 contains the local streaming tech of the Wii U GamePad, which is how GameShare works
11
774
jshackles replied
[Nintendo Life] Xenoblade Chronicles X Wii U vs Switch graphic comparison
News  2
79
5K
Danjin44 replied
Why did Wii U not benefit from its portable mode?
Opinion Retro Hardware  2
56
3K
Hyet replied
Digital Foundry: Xenoblade Chronicles X Definitive Edition - The Last Wii U To Switch Port Is Excellent
Analysis 
35
2K
IAmRei replied
Top Bottom