I'm already looking forward to the WiiU Animal Crossing game. If they make one. And they should.TheDarkEricDraven said:
Yes, I like Animal Crossing. No, I'm not a young girl.
Wii U to be quickly outdated?
- Thread starter dragongit
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yes, I like Animal Crossing. No, I'm not a young girl.
Well there is no need to take this personally... and especially not to make it personal, but lets look at this a bit deeper considering how any output would be limited by what HDTVs can accept as input. And sorry, it was an honest mistake with the maximum texture-resolution I thought it was output resolution. That's what I get trying to rush a response, I have been bombarded with multiple responses to almost every single one of my posts. But lets look a bit deeper at the output capability.Matthew94 said:
It's where it said in the source I provided from:
http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1415921/nintendo_wii_u_hardware_tech_specs_revealed.html
"supports 720p 4x MSAA or 1080p rendering in a single pass"
Emphasis mine. This is saying it can do 1080p, but not with any MSAA. That means it's not just limited by the HDTV, once it get up to 1080p it CANNOT also to any anti-aliasing. To get anti-aliasing, it needs to be only 720p. That's the same as on Xbox 360. 360 can do 1080p output but not 1080p output with MSAA.
If it was powerful like HD4800, it would boast being capable of 1080p AND 4xMSAA output. I know HD4800 can output 1080p with up to 8xAA.
Yes, AMD Bulldozer for gaming. Well, I was friends with a guy who runs a PC repair shop and he kind of made a hard sell on me as he really needed a big order to balance the books. I'm very happy with it as It's able to play the games at the high settings I could not before.Matthew94 said:
And I'd like to reiterate, I don't think Nintendo deserves the benefit of the doubt being this secretive about their console's capability in the E3 event only months before their release. They MUST be more open.
I think the issue is that no one is really considering sales as an indicator of quality. Yes, Nintendo can print money with their hardware releases. I don't think anyone is debating that. What is being debated is whether or not the WiiU will actually be a real played in the coming console generation for an extended period of time.144 said:
Just as a quick and obvious example. The Escapist is pretty much a gaming focused website. It covers all 3 consoles, plus handhelds, plus PC so it's got a pretty good balance. When, however, was the last time anything of substance was posted here regarding the Wii? When was the time before that? I'm not talking about the fickle forum crowd either, I'm talking about the actual staff. Just because Nintendo sells a lot of consles doesn't necessarily mean they have any real impact on what's going in in gaming outside of providing consumer class technology that the other guys occasionally try to copy.
That wasn't really the angle I was going at. As far as a company is concerned, profit=success. You can say that Nintendo only succeeded for two years while the other two still thrive, but the fact of the matter is, in business terms, the exchange proved to be worth it. Nintendo made more money in the Wii's early lifetime than the other two made to date. We see it as a dwindle, but from a business standpoint the Wii did exactly what it was supposed to do.StriderShinryu said:
The thread title questions the WiiU's longevity, but I believe that longevity is only as important as the results it provides.
"The advancements from here on up are in the finer details."j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
What? No.
You can see this with the capability of PC gaming with hardware 10x as powerful giving really tangibly improved game worlds.
"1.5x better" is an arbitrary and rough number, not absolute.
WiiU will still be WAY behind the current state of PC gaming, and will easily be lapped by any true next-gen system.
You should get into PC gaming, there is room in there for from the small indie developer to the big monoliths and every range of graphical capability and spend as much or as little on PC gaming hardware and then upgrade bit by bit affordable.
But you have to realise the madness of console edging forward in capability bit by bit, where you can't adjust settings and upgrade discrete components. The console generations work for a reason to prevent overlap and redundancy. To really move forward consoles you'd have to buy way more systems than you'd have to. A "little bit more powerful console" only delays the inevitable. Better to stay with current gen graphics and save up longer for when a truly next-gen system comes out.
" Actually, the original Xbox was next gen compared to the PS2. "
That is not what a new console generation is. If you want something that is a "little bit" more powerful and capable, then get into PC gaming. Because what you are talking about isn't generations, it's continuous incremental improvement which WORKS on PC because you have variable settings and discrete components.
Yeah, to a completely amateur it "looked like" Sony had shot themselves in the foot launching the PS3, but the actual industry experts like Pachter weren't worried and they knew they'd be sitting pretty like they are today while Wii shot their wad with some quick and easy casual money while Sony built a loyal PS3 base.
And please, stop going on about the world economy. You are desperate to drop several hundred dollars on a system that is only marginally more powerful than current gen consoles, yet object to hardware that is TRULY a generation ahead. Do you want that? Graphical capability 10x what you have gotten bored with? How about the fidelity of Uncharted 2 in full 1080p with the high framerate of Call of Duty and particle effects and reflection with lustre like you've only seen in pre-animated movies.
I think Harvest Moon is. To me whats funny is that they ignore the one series that really captivated most fans (atleast from my experience) Megaman. Yes I know that it is a Capcom title, but it single handedly made the NES/SNES great for my childhood.TheDarkEricDraven said:
I have never been a Pokemon fan, but are the games really that different?
Alas if only it were to death. Then they might restrain themselves. Seriously they slap Mario on the box and people will throw their money at it regardless of quality, it COD for kiddies.Lugbzurg said:
They've got the cash and rabid fan base to produce innovation but they never use it. The most innovative game they've contributed in was Metroid Other M, which only seemed to excel in Misogynism.
I fully agree, they've got the surplus and hubris to fail so I say let them. Being too big to fail is like to being too fat to diet.ResonanceSD said:
Didn't this console generation's sales prove that technical specs are NOT what gets video game consoles into homes?
Gotta have a little more faith in Nintendo, they do kinda have a clue what they're doing in the 'let's print money' game.
I'm not saying the WiiU is a great system; I'm not saying I want it. I'm saying that Nintendo has found ways to make things people DO want. It's like car sales, it's not the cars with the best engines that sell the most units. Tech Specs don't sell units. At the end of the day, consoles are toys and Nintendo has rightfully figured out that selling their systems based on "How can people play with this toy?" is the best way to get their little strangely shaped boxes into your house.
Gotta have a little more faith in Nintendo, they do kinda have a clue what they're doing in the 'let's print money' game.
I'm not saying the WiiU is a great system; I'm not saying I want it. I'm saying that Nintendo has found ways to make things people DO want. It's like car sales, it's not the cars with the best engines that sell the most units. Tech Specs don't sell units. At the end of the day, consoles are toys and Nintendo has rightfully figured out that selling their systems based on "How can people play with this toy?" is the best way to get their little strangely shaped boxes into your house.
I understand that Nintendo are not in a position to build powerful systems for a low price quite like Sony can which is a much large company with more fingers in more pies. Nintendo are a comparatively small company, they have two products: wii and 3DS (DS is virtually retired). While Sony has a Bravia Television/speakers, Vaio computers, Mobile-phones, MP3 players, Cameras, Several Movie Studios, Music recording business, even their own private bank!Matthew94 said:
Nintendo would really struggle to get a highly graphics into their device without the price going through the roof. I don't think Nintendo has the clout like Sony or Microsoft (we know how poerful they are) to get the WiiU with high specs at low price. I just don't see how they can beat Sony and Microsoft going head to head in the HD console game. Who knows, maybe they have some ingenious design but Microsoft jsut seem to have mastered it wit hthe xbox 360 getting such good bang for very little buck.
I know I sound like a broken record, but check out John Carmack's opinion on Xbox 360, even though PC is his platform of choice he heaps praise on how Microsoft does do consoles, from his coding perspective. He loved the support that they give and how he can access the 360's capability.
I know, an hour and a half. You don't have to watch it if you haven't aready, but anyone else reading this I really recommend it.
(if only the guys who designed the gameplay were as brilliant as the guy who coded the engine)
I hate to see Nintendo go head to head against this. Wii may have bought in with a fickle casual market but it stood a chance there.
Looking back, Gamecube saved money in interesting areas. It didn't have a DVD drive when DVD drives were expensive, but they used the underlying technology at much lower cost - essentially mini-DVDs - that had certain benefits. It also didn't even attempt any kind of network or internal storage. it was the most "pure" gaming console of the generation. PS2's price was inflated by how it had to pay DVD forum to licence the right to play DVD movies. Impossible on Gamecube. Of course, that's not so expensive now, DVD forum licences DVD technology much cheaper.
But I remember how I justified buying a PS2 because "it's not just $300 for a console, it's also a DVD player!" while gamecube struggled to sell at $99. What a bargain price. I bought a gamecube way WAY late in the cycle (PS: I live in UK now, but now when gamecube came out).
Bulldozer's great. Especially in parallel stuff. The thing is, it may not be able to render video as fast as some intel stuff, but it can render TWO videos at the same time almost as fast as intel's sandybridge can render one. You know what it's like, it's like having two okay quad-core CPUs. Which is REALLY great if you are trying to live-record gameplay and don't want stutter. in this case it is a GOOD thing that most programs don't try to use more than 4 cores, as you can run multiple at the same time without stepping on each other's toes.
But don't mistake my experience for expertise. If I could give a crude but (not so) relatable example: bulldozer is the AK47 of CPUs. It's cheaper and slower and nastier but it can just take so much grit and keep on chugging. it's not fast but importantly, it's never slow. Which is exactly what I want for my gaming needs, I want NO stutter, not 15% faster. But that's just my, subjective experience.
Any time I've considered overclocking I've been convinced to upgrade instead. Yeah, my PC Repair shop friend buys and sells so much off me, my computer is in his shop right now... hmm, wonder if he's doing anything to it?
last year i thought the WiiU looked amazingly stupid. this year im actually thinking of getting one. it looks like its actually going to have real games, unlike the wii. but of course it doesnt look much better than ps3 or 360 games. it takes developers years to be able to really unlock a consoles full potential. remember when the 360 was first unveiled? it didnt look much better than xbox graphics. right now i am cautiously optimistic about the WiiU
I wish Nintendo the best of luck, but I won't be getting a Wii U unless Elder Scrolls 6 or Fallout 4 turn out to be Wii U exclusive. They just haven't impressed me at all with the controller gimmicks, and I don't see the point buying a shiny new box that is more or less able to run the same things my PS3 does.
I got that impression too. It seems as if Nintendo is trying to compete with the 360 and ps3, instead of preparing for the future. They seem to think being able to compete spec-wise with the current generation of consoles is a laudable quality in a next generation console. I disagree.
HD Zelda, eventually?DigitalAtlas said:
I'd buy a WiiU just for that...
Point: It's a Nintendo console. it'll be fine.
Well what was it that got Wii into people's homes:DracoSuave said:
-Low price point
-Novel and kinda intuitive control interface
-effective marketing
I don't think WiiU really has the same magic this time. WiiU controller has clearly come back from feedback with developers as "make it more like an Xbox 360 controller" and they did. So it's an xbox 360 controller with a very basic touchscreen in the middle, that is not multi-touch and needs a stylus for precision. If that is trying to ape on iPhones and Tablets then it has failed.
It's not exactly the best feature to point out how
Maybe if there is a problem with Timmy play Xbox when dad wants to watch baseball is dad buys another el-cheapo HDTV. It's just not a good sell as "this is the console for people who will be kicked off their game because someone wants to watch TV".
And there is a HUGE CONFLICT right in the middle of all of this. If all games can be played JUST the one screen in the controller, then there won't be that many games that put an emphasis on having two screens! Of if the solution to that is simply pressing a button to switch between the outputs of both screen that STILL RENDERS OBSOLETE the idea of having two screens! Xbox 360 could do the exact same just have a button to switch what the main screen shows. And Microsoft has got the market cornered in screen interaction with Kinect controller that interacts with a HDTV like a stylus interacts with a small screen.
Now Kinect, that may not be cheap but it's has a novel and intuitive control and is effectively marketed.
WiiU still seems unreal to me, I'm still feeling like "is that it?" compared to Microsoft being so effective with Kinect marketing to casual market and increasingly to more mainstream gaming.
I mean the capabilities you could do with a touchscreen are DWARFED by the capabilities with Kinect and a HDTV screen. Even on the intuitive basis. To me, neither stylus touchscreen nor kinect are sellers but it's their wider market appeal that matters.
Yet I realise Nintendo doesn't stand a chance any other way. They are a relatively small company with limited capital, they can't come up with anything like kinect. A resistive stylus-based touchscreen in an ostensibly bog-standard controller is probably the best they can do. I just can't imagine what Miyamoto would do with this. I just can't imagine him playing call of duty and looking down at the touchscreen for the radar.
Well I don't know where you got that failure rate from (even with precision down to one decimal place) but Microsoft did have the capital to replace every single system that failed inside the extended warranty. Nintendo couldn't afford that. Nor could they afford to fix said problem when it arises, Nintendo is not a company that can afford console design revisions.j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
Xbox 360 obviously do not have a high failure rate any more nor are the early iterations doomed to fail. I have an early iteration and even after 5 years it still hasn't red-ringed nor even had any game crashes.
The point is WiiU will be launching with all the difficulties of launch while Xbox 360 is already well established and has ironed out all the problems. And Nintendo has limited capital. Hell, Microsoft might just be really evil and deliberately undercut WiiU by $50 for Xbox 360 WITH Kinect and roll out a huge new winter ad campaign. One thing Sony did when it competed against Dreamcast was it would negotiate shelf space that DEMANDED priority of Playstation 2 over Dreamcast or they wouldn't get any Playstation 2 units to sell at all.
And we all know how that turned out for Dreamcast.
As the gaming messiah I feel like imparting a few words of wisdom.
If the WiiU wins everyone wins. If the WiiU does poorly it'll hurt everyone, even those who don't buy it.
In any competitive marketplace, the consumer benefits from added competition. Each rival company puts pressure on the rest to perform well and stay competitive. When one fails the others become more secure, have less motivation to do well, and the market as a whole stagnates.
As a Nintendo fan I always hope for success for both Sony and Microsoft's systems because it means Miyamoto will work harder to please me and the rest of the Nintendo fanbase.
So you see, while Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft may be rivals, we the consumers shouldn't be.
As to whether or not the WiiU will succeed; of course it will. We shouldn't define success though as whether a company sells more units or makes more money than it's competitors. The Gamecube was certainly a success for Nintendo. Nintendo made money off it, they came out ahead. In the end that's all that truly mattered. For a console to fail it must lose money for it's respective company like the Virtual Boy or the Gizmodo.
Will WiiU do better than the 720/PS4? Who knows. Will it be the next Virtual Boy? I highly doubt it.
If the WiiU wins everyone wins. If the WiiU does poorly it'll hurt everyone, even those who don't buy it.
In any competitive marketplace, the consumer benefits from added competition. Each rival company puts pressure on the rest to perform well and stay competitive. When one fails the others become more secure, have less motivation to do well, and the market as a whole stagnates.
As a Nintendo fan I always hope for success for both Sony and Microsoft's systems because it means Miyamoto will work harder to please me and the rest of the Nintendo fanbase.
So you see, while Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft may be rivals, we the consumers shouldn't be.
As to whether or not the WiiU will succeed; of course it will. We shouldn't define success though as whether a company sells more units or makes more money than it's competitors. The Gamecube was certainly a success for Nintendo. Nintendo made money off it, they came out ahead. In the end that's all that truly mattered. For a console to fail it must lose money for it's respective company like the Virtual Boy or the Gizmodo.
Will WiiU do better than the 720/PS4? Who knows. Will it be the next Virtual Boy? I highly doubt it.
What's with all the people on this forum just stating that Nintendo will fail despite tons of evidence to the contrary?
-Nintendo will aim for a 300$ price. It's the smart thing. So we got that out of the way.
-You guys noticed how Sony and Microsoft are pushing their addons to the public? They really don't want to make a new console. It's too expensive and frankly, they're still recovering from their financial losses. Speaking of...
-You know how damn expensive the 360 and PS3 debuted with? The PS3 had a fucking 600$]/i] price tag. That was before the economic depression. They will not be able to afford a new console.
I guarantee that 80% of this thread hate Nintendo because of Yahtzee. Make opinions for yourself people! Last I checked, Nintendo has been kicking some serious ass since 2006. It was no accident. Everyone who thinks so is in denial and really needs to be more open minded about things.
-Nintendo will aim for a 300$ price. It's the smart thing. So we got that out of the way.
-You guys noticed how Sony and Microsoft are pushing their addons to the public? They really don't want to make a new console. It's too expensive and frankly, they're still recovering from their financial losses. Speaking of...
-You know how damn expensive the 360 and PS3 debuted with? The PS3 had a fucking 600$]/i] price tag. That was before the economic depression. They will not be able to afford a new console.
I guarantee that 80% of this thread hate Nintendo because of Yahtzee. Make opinions for yourself people! Last I checked, Nintendo has been kicking some serious ass since 2006. It was no accident. Everyone who thinks so is in denial and really needs to be more open minded about things.
