E3: Nintendo Boss Admits Third Party Wii U Footage Came from Other Platforms

[ReservoirAngel]

What's brilliant about this is that at the conference, people were yelling when they showed the 3rd party games footage that is looked horrible in comparison to PS3 and Xbox 360...uh-huh...that's mighty funny there guys...

The human mind is a retarded beast. You can convince yourself of something and even if it's not true, you still perceive it that way. It's why placebo pills work in medicine. You think it's one thing and your brain tricks you into that fantasy.

So hardcore anti-Nintendo gamers were so quick to immediately judge the Wii-U based on that 3rd party footage they started inventing graphical inferiorities in their minds to satisfy their vendettas.

 

[katsabas]

Surprised. Seriously? Why do they need to resort to this sort of tricks, they already own most of the gaming market.

Hmmm, something similar happened to the Beijing Olympics a couple of years ago. Anybody remember this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/olympics/2545387/Beijing-Olympics-Faking-scandal-over-girl-who-sang-in-opening-ceremony.html

 

[Electrogecko]

Gotta love how people usually cry about new ways of gaming and when they do get at least the potential to be able to have truly different gaming experiences, they cry about graphics.

Just goes to show, 95% of all gamers on the planet are full of shit

Well of course they're full of shit. Most gamers I meet have no clue about actual design or innovation. They ***** about Nintendo about using 20+-year-old franchises that constantly reinvent themselves while also keeping what worked and yet they have no trouble fellating games that are just cookie-cutter crap copy-pasted from the generic FPS, WRPG, TPS, or action game design solely because they have a name that isn't a sequel to something else. No, gamers have no clue what they actually want 90% of the time, they have to flatout TOLD what they want. Nintendo does its own thing and thank GOD for that

Thank you for this. Also, it's amazing how people are already saying the consoles not powerful enough when we have no fucking clue how powerful it is.

And OT: ummmm.......duh?

 

[ultimateownage]

So to tout their awesome new system that will be out in 2012, they used footage from systems that came out in 2005 & 2006. Think about that for a moment. Let it sink in.

Nintendo's mistake wasn't using the footage from PS360 and trying to hide it. Their mistake is making a system that is EQUAL, and not LEAPYEARS BETTER.

You can't lure the hardcore audience back over to your side by asking them to pay for a system that looks the same as what we already have. That's not very smrt. Not very smrt at all.

Silly Nintendo.

OR you can realise that keeping this level of graphics capabilities was the good idea because it looks nice and doesn't take the developers too much time and effort to work with, and then stop wanting superfluous and superficial upgrades.

 

[PhunkyPhazon]

I'm still a little concerned over future third party support. Don't get me wrong, things look great at the moment. But I wouldn't be surprised if E3 2012 is when Microsoft and Sony show off their new consoles with Super Mega HD 2160p or whatever. Then we'll have the exact same situation on our hands as before: third parties either ignore the Wii U or deliver extremely dumbed down ports of otherwise excellent games.

I'm sure it will still be worth getting just for the first party games, but Reggie's claims about better support don't really fill me with confidence. Not yet, anyways.

 

[The.Bard]

So to tout their awesome new system that will be out in 2012, they used footage from systems that came out in 2005 & 2006. Think about that for a moment. Let it sink in.

Nintendo's mistake wasn't using the footage from PS360 and trying to hide it. Their mistake is making a system that is EQUAL, and not LEAPYEARS BETTER.

You can't lure the hardcore audience back over to your side by asking them to pay for a system that looks the same as what we already have. That's not very smrt. Not very smrt at all.

Silly Nintendo.

OR you can realise that keeping this level of graphics capabilities was the good idea because it looks nice and doesn't take the developers too much time and effort to work with, and then stop wanting superfluous and superficial upgrades.

You make a good point from a developer's standpoint, but as a consumer, that's not nearly good enough. WHY should I pay for this when it's not improving the systems I've had for the last SIX YEARS? You want several hundred dollars from me, I need something better than a touchscreen remote and another frakkin Mario game. MUCH better.

They seem to be flip-flopping between trying to get hardcore gamers back and expanding for the casuals.

The casuals don't care about graphics, but in large, they also won't want to pay for another Wii. Your typical soccer mom will say "Wii U? What a stupid name. And you already have one, little Timmy."

The hardcores already have 360/PS3/PC. They are not going to buy this thing just for a touchscreen and a zillion more Zelda/Mario games. If the Gamecube didn't burn 'em on Nintendo's commitment to solid 3rd party games, the Wii sure as heck did.

In my ridiculously unqualified opinion, I really don't see this plan working out unless they take a huge hit and do this thing for $250 or less.

 

[Oly J]

So to tout their awesome new system that will be out in 2012, they used footage from systems that came out in 2005 & 2006. Think about that for a moment. Let it sink in.

Nintendo's mistake wasn't using the footage from PS360 and trying to hide it. Their mistake is making a system that is EQUAL, and not LEAPYEARS BETTER.

You can't lure the hardcore audience back over to your side by asking them to pay for a system that looks the same as what we already have. That's not very smrt. Not very smrt at all.

Silly Nintendo.

that is a valid point but let's remember those were games that already exist, for all anyone knows at the moment, the Wii U could be capable of much better graphics and much larger games, although in my opinion I don't think graphics are going to get much better than they are anyway, which in my book is good because that means developers can focus on other things, like Nintendo always do, (admittedly that doesn't always work but experimentation is good) sure the Wii was a flop in the eyes of many, myself included, but the Gamecube was my favorite console of it's generation. so as long as the controls aren't awful to use like the Wii I'll be happy

Good points, all. My big sticking point is the price. If they squeeze this baby out for $200-300, I think they have a great chance to dent the market. If this thing drops at $400+ with one controller, and additional controllers at $75-100+, then I think Nintendo has some serious holes in their canoe.

The 3DS is already have a hard time making headway in the market, mostly because they thought glasses were the only reason people hated 3D. If a "more or less as powerful as a 360" console ends up costing $600 when you add up all the peripherals... they can kiss their days of printing money bye bye.

Either way, I won't be buying it. Nintendo abandoned my style of gaming a long time ago, my backlog of games isn't getting any shorter, and the iphone has defied my expectations in the "only have 20 minutes, so what will I do?" department. This most-idiotically-name-device-ever fills a need that I don't have now, and won't have in a year or two.

fair enough, I myself hoped for a better name, but Nintendo don't generally overprice their consoles I seem to remember (at least in my area of the UK) Nintendo consoles generally being cheaper than the other 2...with the exception of the 3DS

 

[Amondren]

Really dumb of them to show that shit they should have shown nothing. I hope that it turns out to be as good as they claim.

 

[NinjaSpaceCore]

It doesn't matter what Nintendo was showing as footage. Nothing seems to ever be actual gameplay. It's either misleading cutscenes or made-for-E3 movies. The system isn't coming out for a while. It was just now announced. No one can expect them to have any fully working games to show off yet.

 

[Raeil]

So, what you're saying is that in an E3 environment, where everyone watching it generally pays attention to everything that is happening, Nintendo stated "these titles are coming," showed trailers with 360 and PS3 versions, and then in an interview immediately after the conference said that they were from the 360 and PS3 versions?

That actually seems pretty reasonable, considering the timeframe and the event itself. Would it have been nice to mention it during the press conference? Sure. However, in this event, very little in the way of news gets away from the standard E3-watching gamer. Nintendo knew they would be able to answer in the negative very quickly, and did so almost immediately.

Ah well, regardless of this particular thing, the system should do pretty well if it's priced as promised. Actual online, HD capable, casual and hardcore controls and games, a nifty idea for transferring content (which Sony is also doing between home console and portables), plus much better tech than the 360 and PS3. I'm optimistic at this point, and I hope I'm placing my optimism properly.

(Also, to the person who at some point in this thread said "Isn't this just the HD Wii everyone was asking for?" Yes and then some, and if everyone was asking for it then the fact that it's here and has more power than the 360/PS3 is a good thing...)

 

[mjc0961]

Hopefully it will be able to handle true 1080p instead of 720p upscaled to 1080p like the 360 and PS3 are usually doing. That would get some people to shut up about i- Oh who am I kidding, they'd just deny that most 360 and PS3 games are native 720p being upscaled. >_<

And yet people still said that they looked worse than their Xbox 360 and PS3 counterparts.

Of course Sony and Microsoft fanboys said that. They're fanboys.

Ah well, regardless of this particular thing, the system should do pretty well if it's priced as promised.

Where did Nintendo promise anything about pricing? Got a link? I'd love to read or watch it, as I missed that news.

 

[Awexsome]

I remember an Extra Credits episode where they talked about how the goal is no longer just to have good graphics with each new console release. I mean if you needed the top graphics capability out there look at the PC. You can get it there but it'll cost you >1000$.

It won't fly if consoles borrow the biggest weakness from the PC just to give amazing graphics.

If the Wii U can match the 360 and PS3's level of graphics I'd be ok with it. I mean you can have Nintendo's signature franchises with the Wii, now if you can still get a lot of the great third party games and still use a Nintendo console for their exclusives things I'd say are looking good.

 

[CrystalShadow]

AND SO... The only real measure of what's can be done (and done well) with Nintendo's new console is stuff from Nintendo. Quelle surprise

What I want to know is if that bit with the bird was genuine Wii U.

Reggie said it was from a very early dev kit. Implying that the finalised hardware is more powerful than what the bird demo was running on.

 

[Azure Knight-Zeo]

Thank goodness, because the tablet is just asking to be used as the motion tracker in Aliens Colonial Marines.

 

[Shirokurou]

Why? Why on earth would you admit such a thing?
No one would notice, you know...

 

[Bomberman4000]

I really wish people would get over the sticking point of graphics as the make or break point for this system. I'm excited about it, I'm going to get it. I didn't like the Wii because I didn't like the control scheme. I didn't like the online functionality (or lack there of) and I didn't like that there were so few games for it that weren't carnival based mini-game collections.

Why is it so hard to believe that in the time we're in now, graphics aren't going to get "leap years better" (to use a phrase I saw earlier)? I know it's the first thing people notice about games, but the Wii had terrible graphics and it was more popular than money itself. Everyone's talking about the name too like it's the new Nintendo KKK model. The name Wii U will grow on people just like the name Wii did. Sure there will be puns made about the name but eventually people will get over it and move on.

This thing will sell, it'll pull back some (not all) of the "hardcore gamers" (some won't go simply because their pride won't let'em) and it'll be the next step in Nintendo's evolution.

And I plan on getting it day one.

 

[BanthaFodder]

And yet people still said that they looked worse than their Xbox 360 and PS3 counterparts.

Proof that people are too quick to jump at negatives before positives.

I'm fine with them using other platforms. Over a year is still a long time away, and I doubt developers would want to start putting in time on the Wii U before it's even announced to the public. Just my 2 cents...

I laughed and laughed so hard once I read this...

"NINTENDO SUCKS BAWWLZ!!! JUST LOOK AT THOSE GRAPHICS, THEY'RE TERRIBLE!!! PS3/360 IS SO MUCH BETTER!!!"
"That IS the PS3/360..."
"..."
XD
oh, sweet sweet poetic justice...