Hardware Vigil art director says: "Wii U is a pretty powerful machine"

  • Thread starter Deleted_171835
  • Start date
  • Views 13,983
  • Replies 92

mjh2260

Member
Newcomer
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
18
Trophies
0
XP
28
Country
United States
Actually, the N64 had no dedicated VRAM. It was pooled with the system memory which was more than the PSX. The amount of memory wasn't a problem.

I can't say for certain this applies to N64, but, RAM is generally so much slower than VRAM. This is why a loptop running integrated Intel 9xx graphics with shared memory couldn't play decent games even though they were hardware 3d capable.
 

AlanWeird

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2011
Messages
304
Trophies
0
Age
38
Location
Scotland
XP
494
Country
The wii U is going to be powerful. It'll be the dreamcast in this race. Huge head start. Will do things the PS3 and 360 can only dream about, and then new consoles will come from MS and Sony, they won't be such a massive leap compared to what we're used to, and people will call shenanigans. Eat that Pachter, you trolling little bitch.
 

Gahars

Bakayaro Banzai
Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
10,255
Trophies
0
XP
14,723
Country
United States
The wii U is going to be powerful. It'll be the dreamcast in this race. Huge head start. Will do things the PS3 and 360 can only dream about, and then new consoles will come from MS and Sony, they won't be such a massive leap compared to what we're used to, and people will call shenanigans. Eat that Pachter, you trolling little bitch.

Um... you remember what happened to the Dreamcast and Sega, right?

Sounds like it would confirm Pachter's general predictions (that the system will fail, or at least, not be a great success for Nintendo) more than anything else.
 

Midna

Banned!
Banned
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
3,336
Trophies
0
XP
1,044
Country
Albania
The wii U is going to be powerful. It'll be the dreamcast in this race. Huge head start. Will do things the PS3 and 360 can only dream about, and then new consoles will come from MS and Sony, they won't be such a massive leap compared to what we're used to, and people will call shenanigans. Eat that Pachter, you trolling little bitch.

Um... you remember what happened to the Dreamcast and Sega, right?

Sounds like it would confirm Pachter's general predictions (that the system will fail, or at least, not be a great success for Nintendo) more than anything else.
Sega's internal problems and the Saturn killed the Dreamcast. Patcher's a moron if he thinks the thing failed because of Sony.
 

AlanWeird

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2011
Messages
304
Trophies
0
Age
38
Location
Scotland
XP
494
Country
I also made those predictions :P

No, pachter is right when it's incredibly obvious that something's going to happen.

The WiiU will sit fine for just about every nintendo fan out there. Microsoft will end up in a heap of trouble over its focus on its stupid camera games, and then copy the wii U controller.

Nintendo is onto a winner here. It's focus is obviously back on what its fans want, not what fickle old people and casual gamers want. It's obviously going to be ahead of the curve powerwise for a while, and you can see the fear in sony and ms fanboys eyes because all they wanna talk about is the next iterations of their consoles, which, right now, not a shred of concrete evidence exists for. If they're coming, they sure as hell ain't coming anytime soon.
 

Gahars

Bakayaro Banzai
Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
10,255
Trophies
0
XP
14,723
Country
United States
The wii U is going to be powerful. It'll be the dreamcast in this race. Huge head start. Will do things the PS3 and 360 can only dream about, and then new consoles will come from MS and Sony, they won't be such a massive leap compared to what we're used to, and people will call shenanigans. Eat that Pachter, you trolling little bitch.

Um... you remember what happened to the Dreamcast and Sega, right?

Sounds like it would confirm Pachter's general predictions (that the system will fail, or at least, not be a great success for Nintendo) more than anything else.
Sega's internal problems and the Saturn killed the Dreamcast. Patcher's a moron if he thinks the thing failed because of Sony.

Sony's console did play a role, though it obviously wasn't everything. That's not the point, though.

The point is, when you're trying to predict the success of a console with an example from the past, make sure your example doesn't undermine your argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

AlanWeird

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2011
Messages
304
Trophies
0
Age
38
Location
Scotland
XP
494
Country
True that. I adored my dreamcast, but too many mistakes were made. Lacking EA as a developer is just shooting yourself. You gotta depend on bros and fratboys to buy your console. Bros loved the gamecube. I mean, check that donald glover video!
 

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,818
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,789
Country
Poland
True that. I adored my dreamcast, but too many mistakes were made. Lacking EA as a developer is just shooting yourself. You gotta depend on bros and fratboys to buy your console. Bros loved the gamecube. I mean, check that donald glover video!
The Gamecube failed for all the different reasons. It was a great console specs-wise, that much is certain... however it was a console with one foot stuck in the past.

Nintendo, fearing licensing fees created a console that was stripped off of all DVD functionality in a day and age when such functionality was a standard. Using miniDVD as a medium and shaping the console so that it would not be able to accept ordinary DVD's or CD's and never equipping it with a proper multimedia suite when the PS2 and the XBox had them was an idiotic move - media centers were all the rage at that time.

The PS2 and the XBox were both "more than just gaming consoles" - they were proper entertainment centers. The Gamecube offered too little and too late - the XBox simply had "more" to show and the PS2 already had an established library. The Cube was a quality console, but it had little chances for success when the competitors were vastly superior in many aspects.

Of course this is only one of the factors. I could go on and on about how the XBox allowed a degree of PC connectivity and the Cube didn't, about how it was the only console of its generation with no built-in drive or an add-on to add one, about how it didn't have a USB port and so on and so forth, only what for? That's all plain and obvious.

If it *had* those functions, I wouldn't be suprised if it fared better.
 
D

Deleted_171835

Guest
OP
The wii U is going to be powerful. It'll be the dreamcast in this race. Huge head start. Will do things the PS3 and 360 can only dream about, and then new consoles will come from MS and Sony, they won't be such a massive leap compared to what we're used to, and people will call shenanigans. Eat that Pachter, you trolling little bitch.
I think the head-start will help them this time. The current HD consoles have been around for 6+ years. It's due time for a new console. As long as Nintendo has a great launch line-up and has a steady stream of titles soon after launch (I'm looking at you, Playstation Vita), they should be okay. In terms of power, it'll probably be akin to the PS2 of last-gen. Not as powerful as the PS4 or 720 but more than powerful enough to recieve ports that don't have to be toned down significantly. And if it ends up becoming the market leader, that problem is eliminated all-together.
 

heartgold

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
4,378
Trophies
0
Location
London
Website
Visit site
XP
2,085
Country
True that. I adored my dreamcast, but too many mistakes were made. Lacking EA as a developer is just shooting yourself. You gotta depend on bros and fratboys to buy your console. Bros loved the gamecube. I mean, check that donald glover video!
The Gamecube failed for all the different reasons. It was a great console specs-wise, that much is certain... however it was a console with one foot stuck in the past.

Nintendo, fearing licensing fees created a console that was stripped off of all DVD functionality in a day and age when such functionality was a standard. Using miniDVD as a medium and shaping the console so that it would not be able to accept ordinary DVD's or CD's and never equipping it with a proper multimedia suite when the PS2 and the XBox had them was an idiotic move - media centers were all the rage at that time.

The PS2 and the XBox were both "more than just gaming consoles" - they were proper entertainment centers. The Gamecube offered too little and too late - the XBox simply had "more" to show and the PS2 already had an established library. The Cube was a quality console, but it had little chances for success when the competitors were vastly superior in many aspects.

Of course this is only one of the factors. I could go on and on about how the XBox allowed a degree of PC connectivity and the Cube didn't, about how it was the only console of its generation with no built-in drive or an add-on to add one, about how it didn't have a USB port and so on and so forth, only what for? That's all plain and obvious.

If it *had* those functions, I wouldn't be suprised if it fared better.
Why must you dwell in the past? :P

Obviously Wii U will have problems against the likes of the new Sony/Microsoft home consoles to come. I'm not sure if I will even buy A Wii-U as there's no games I want on it, perhaps on E3 they'll blow my mind away. Nintendo handhelds have always been better for me cos the low tech doesn't matter that much and good support from 3rd parties.
 

flamepanther

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2011
Messages
159
Trophies
0
XP
196
Country
United States
Who honestly gives a fuck about how powerful the Wii U is? It's all about the games, Bro.

A powerfull console usually means more third party support which usually means better games. That's why people didn't like the Wii. It was weak so third party developers avoided it like the plague.
You could probably say something less true than this statement, but you'd have to try pretty hard.

PSP was considerably more powerful than the DS, yet most of the good 3rd party development went to DS.

GameCube and XBOX were both more powerful than PS2, but we know where the games went.

N64 and Saturn were both more powerful than the PS1, and yet where were the games? On the weaker system.

Sega Genesis and Neo Geo were both more powerful than the SNES, which had all of the 3rd party support.

Game Gear and Lynx were more powerful than the GameBoy.

Sega Master System and Atari 7800 were more powerful than than the NES.

Intellivision was significantly more powerful than the Atari VCS 2600.


Barring the Pong clones, that's every generation of game consoles right there, and at no point in history has the more powerful console won most of the 3rd party support. There are a lot of factors involved in determining who gets the games, the most important being installed userbase, publishing costs and licensing, and ease of development. The relative power of the console is on the list, but it's toward the very bottom. Developers might complain, but the publishing houses call the shots on that. No point in making a game on the hardware you prefer if nobody will fund development or publish the product.
 

Midna

Banned!
Banned
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
3,336
Trophies
0
XP
1,044
Country
Albania

emigre

Deck head
Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
8,515
Trophies
2
Age
33
Location
London
Website
gbatemp.net
XP
13,698
Country
United Kingdom
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

Midna

Banned!
Banned
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
3,336
Trophies
0
XP
1,044
Country
Albania
I'm not sure if I will even buy A Wii-U as there's no games I want on it
I... what?

He said he's not sure he'll buy a Wii-U as there's no games he want on it.
There's also no games on the PS5, and no game companies so far have pledged support for 2017's processor architecture shift.
I... what?
He's saying that the Wii U isn't out yet, and nobody knows what games there are for it
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

flamepanther

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2011
Messages
159
Trophies
0
XP
196
Country
United States
Sega Genesis and Neo Geo were both more powerful than the SNES, which had all of the 3rd party support.


Since when when was the Genesis more powerful than the SNES?
Since it had a Motorola 6800 in it that was faster than the custom chip in the SNES and since the system was demonstrably able to handle more sprites on screen and more layers of parallaxing background. I thought this was all common knowledge by now. I'm an SNES guy myself, and even I can admit it. SNES had the upper hand in colors supported, and by most accounts in sound as well, but not in processing.
Since when did the SNES have all the 3rd party support?
Figuratively since about the time Capcom released Street Fighter II on the SNES. Literally since about 1995 and onward. Third parties like Treasure and Technosoft released some really killer Genesis exclusives, and there were certainly lots of sports titles from EA, but all of the really heavy hitters at the time (Capcom, Konami, Square, Enix, etc.) put their support primarily or even exclusively behind Nintendo after Sega's head start was over.

In any case, even if you don't believe me, there's more than enough evidence that powerful hardware isn't what brings the games.
 

Midna

Banned!
Banned
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
3,336
Trophies
0
XP
1,044
Country
Albania
The difference in power between the Super Nintendo and the Genesis has been a subject of heavy debate in some places. I do not believe there is one clear cut answer.

But the Genesis has blast processing, so there's that.
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    SylverReZ @ SylverReZ: @salazarcosplay, Morning