Hardware How powerful does the WiiU have to be for you to be satisfied with it?

[CrimzonEyed]

The promised 50% stronger than PS3 Is more than enough for me.

 

[Deltaechoe]

The promised 50% stronger than PS3 Is more than enough for me.

I want to be wowed

 

[Taleweaver]

I voted "At least on-par with the PS3/360.". With game production costs increasing with each generation (and the costs not being translated in a better gaming experience), I think the current generation is fine. In fact...I think the whole reason why nintendo needs to "step it up" is just because the standards of game development are at Sony/MS's level.

As such, I'd summarize it as "I want the console that gives the game developers the least extra production/porting costs".


I admit having doubts about voting for that half-step. But that would just be because it'll take less whining from fanboys of the other consoles...which is something that will happen no matter what.

 

[chavosaur]

Here is my biggest thing about the wii-u. Although I don't know for sure how powerful it is yet (minus the 50% more powerful then ps3 and whatnot) My big question is this. Why is nintendo only upping the processing power past the ps3 and 360? Why not set a new standard in terms of power? I understand that now they want to "Fix their last mistakes and appeal to the core gamers" But theres one thing I know about core gamers. They love graphics, they love power, and they love online play. The 360 and the ps3 have got this stuff down, the wii-u will be getting it down. So what will happen, when sony and microsoft release their next consoles? I just don't think nintendo prioritized enough in terms of power. Don't get me wrong, nintendo fans will stay true to the wii-u. But so many people have jumped into microsofts and sonys boat, it leaves me to wonder how nintendo will keep up? Nintendo will never die, but their reign as king of games is already over (that reign died awhile back) It'll be much more sad to see them sink lower if things don't go their way.

 

[TripleSMoon]

But theres one thing I know about core gamers. They love graphics, they love power, and they love online play.

Since when? And what defines a "core gamer" anyway? I'm not saying that Nintendo doesn't need to put more graphics and power and better online play into the Wii U, I'm just saying I really don't think that's what core gamers all value most. My personal opinion is that, when Nintendo said "core gamers", they were talking about, well, the opposite of the casual gamers the Wii seemed to cater to. And of course, the loss of "core gamers" by this definition was caused by an EXTREME lack of serious games (the lack of 3rd party titles especially). That's what I think, anyway.

 

[DiscostewSM]

Here is my biggest thing about the wii-u. Although I don't know for sure how powerful it is yet (minus the 50% more powerful then ps3 and whatnot) My big question is this. Why is nintendo only upping the processing power past the ps3 and 360? Why not set a new standard in terms of power? I understand that now they want to "Fix their last mistakes and appeal to the core gamers" But theres one thing I know about core gamers. They love graphics, they love power, and they love online play. The 360 and the ps3 have got this stuff down, the wii-u will be getting it down. So what will happen, when sony and microsoft release their next consoles? I just don't think nintendo prioritized enough in terms of power. Don't get me wrong, nintendo fans will stay true to the wii-u. But so many people have jumped into microsofts and sonys boat, it leaves me to wonder how nintendo will keep up? Nintendo will never die, but their reign as king of games is already over (that reign died awhile back) It'll be much more sad to see them sink lower if things don't go their way.

Considering how well they did with the underpowered shrimp called the Wii, going balls out with a new system to overpower the competition would not be wise, from both a resource and financial point of view. You see how long it took Sony to get the PS3 into respectable figures after it launched? Even if Nintendo wanted to, they don't have the resources nor the funding to go all out like this.

Besides, the competition has been saying they won't be going all out like they did this last time, so why should Nintendo?

 

[TripleSMoon]

Even if Nintendo wanted to, they don't have the resources nor the funding to go all out like this.

You realize Nintendo has enough money in the bank to last them until 2052 if they continue to have losses like in 2011 every year, right?

http://www.gamesradar.com/nintendo-doomed-not-likely-just-take-look-how-much-money-its-got-bank/

So, I think it's pretty safe to say they DEFINITELY have the funds, and hence resources, if they want to. Just saying.

Besides, the competition has been saying they won't be going all out like they did this last time, so why should Nintendo?

I definitely agree here. But either way, wouldn't it be nice to be the "definitive system"? It would definitely help.

 

[KingVamp]

So, I think it's pretty safe to say they DEFINITELY have the funds, and hence resources, if they want to. Just saying.

Unseen things beyond just loses,no? They can't put everything into on console willy nilly , they have to be prepare.

 

[TripleSMoon]

of course. I'm just saying that funds aren't a problem.

 

[BasedKiliK]

Even if Nintendo wanted to, they don't have the resources nor the funding to go all out like this.

If that were true, they wouldn't have dropped the price of the 3DS within a single year.

Both the Wii and the Nintendo DS got them some serious bank over the years. They've even stated that the sales they had made allowed them to take risks with the 3DS. And seeing how well that's doing nowadays, they've probably already come back up to their estimated sales. So I'd say at this point they could pretty much do whatever they wanted.

That said, I'd be satisfied as long as the WiiU is more powerful than the PS3 and 360, as was initially announced. It's all about the games and functionality, not pure power and graphical prowess (though having that too would be a plus).

 

[Midna]

I've

Here is my biggest thing about the wii-u. Although I don't know for sure how powerful it is yet (minus the 50% more powerful then ps3 and whatnot) My big question is this. Why is nintendo only upping the processing power past the ps3 and 360? Why not set a new standard in terms of power?

Because of price. The PS3 sales were just awful when it first launched at $599. Plus, for a significant amount of time, Nintendo is going to have to directly compete against the PS360. If the price is double theirs they're going to have trouble selling.

 

[chavosaur]

I made the list for think before you post :3 Either way, im not really into the wii-u for its power(although maybe my top post made me sound that way) All I expect from ninty, is games that still wow me and give me goosebumps when I play them. Games that immerse me in an epic story! But I always worry what nintendo will do if it makes a mistake, which is what my top post was about. However, coming from you guys, I make myself seem like a worrywart and should just let nintendo do their thing and cross my fingers :3

 

[Hells Malice]

I don't give a shit about specs, I just want it to have an online service that doesn't suck. That's really all I ask for.
Being just as powerful as a PS3 is now would be fine, there's really no huge need to go above that really. I have a PC for games like that.

 

[ShinyLatios]

But theres one thing I know about core gamers. They love graphics, they love power, and they love online play.

That is not what defines a core gamer.

 

[T3GZdev]

im ok with it being atleast half a step up from ps3/360 for now.
with the specs below frmo the last gen consoles being pointed out
PS3= CPU: 3.2GHz, GPU: 550MHz, RAM: 256MB, VRAM: 256MB
360= CPU: 3.2GHz, GPU: 500MHz, RAM 512MB

with those being said if the wii u is half a step up?
(that is half stepping all the specs from ps3/360)
Wii U= CPU: 4.8GHz, GPU: 825MHz, RAM: 768MB, VRAM: 384MB

but if were talking fully beyond just half stepping up.
(the below specs are doubled from ps3/360 but im saying the wii u specs being beyond the specs below.)
(every gen the console specs is doubled from every last gen console)
Wii U= CPU: 6.4GHz, GPU: 1.1GHz, RAM: 1GB, VRAM: 512

heres basically my guess & where i see them most likely makeing the specs for wii u.
CPU: 6.5GHz, GPU: 2GHz, RAM: 6GB:, VRAM 4GB (atleast from the rumors i hear about the wii u having loads of RAM)

 

[ThePowerOutage]

Real-time 1080p support, Support for 4K res

 

[DiscostewSM]

im ok with it being atleast half a step up from ps3/360 for now.
with the specs below frmo the last gen consoles being pointed out
PS3= CPU: 3.2GHz, GPU: 550MHz, RAM: 256MB, VRAM: 256MB
360= CPU: 3.2GHz, GPU: 500MHz, RAM 512MB

with those being said if the wii u is half a step up?
(that is half stepping all the specs from ps3/360)
Wii U= CPU: 4.8GHz, GPU: 825MHz, RAM: 768MB, VRAM: 384MB

but if were talking fully beyond just half stepping up.
(the below specs are doubled from ps3/360 but im saying the wii u specs being beyond the specs below.)
(every gen the console specs is doubled from every last gen console)
Wii U= CPU: 6.4GHz, GPU: 1.1GHz, RAM: 1GB, VRAM: 512

heres basically my guess & where i see them most likely makeing the specs for wii u.
CPU: 6.5GHz, GPU: 2GHz, RAM: 6GB:, VRAM 4GB (atleast from the rumors i hear about the wii u having loads of RAM)

Dunno about that clock frequency, but advances in CPU architecture allow improved performance with lower clock speeds.

 

[BornInBlack]

Considering that there aren't too many console games that run at native 1080p nor (to my knowledge) are the HD twins capable off running true 1080p without a sacrifice in frame rate or somewhere else, the Wii U is in a good place graphic wise. 4k just send excessive ATM. I don't see any 4K TVs out yet, and who could afford that level of development right now?
I see this generation as one that will perfect 1080 games with smooth fame rates, textures, general polishing. We all spent the last 10 years or so transitioning from SD to HD, I think it would be foolish to push for 4K till we Max out what is currently available.

 

[TripleSMoon]

Considering that there aren't too many console games that run at native 1080p nor (to my knowledge) are the HD twins capable off running true 1080p without a sacrifice in frame rate or somewhere else, the Wii U is in a good place graphic wise. 4k just send excessive ATM. I don't see any 4K TVs out yet, and who could afford that level of development right now?
I see this generation as one that will perfect 1080 games with smooth fame rates, textures, general polishing. We all spent the last 10 years or so transitioning from SD to HD, I think it would be foolish to push for 4K till we Max out what is currently available.

You have to remember that a console generation is usually at least 5-7 years (heck, the PS3 swears to stick by a 10-year plan). Why exclude a feature that could very easily become very usable in just a few years, just because it isn't available now?

 

[Foxi4]

Real-time 1080p support, Support for 4K res

Uhm...

For image viewing? Sure, why not. For games? Video? No. Just... no. 1080p more than enough for good quality video.