number 1.: We can have whatever we please, Gosh, I Think you've taken too many hockey pucks to your head Mr. Canadian...
number 2.: There is no cake, so we can't have it, OR Eat it, as it doesn't exist, It's a LIE.
Depends how you want to achieve backwards compatibility though, the xbox 360 had bc but it achieved it through emulation, the ps3 had various bc which was achieved through hardware and emulation, so you can have both, it just seem Microsoft and Sony didn't feel there was any worth in investing in it this time around.
Besides if you learned from one golden egg Sony discovered last gen, HD collections are an affordable and easy way to make money. If Sony was to offer an Uncharted Collection on the PS4 running at 1080p/60fps it would probably make more money than Sony paying for a PS3 emulator for the PS4 to be made
I agree with OP, there are no wii titles worth owning, thus no reason for the wiiu to have BC, but what's even more baffling is the lack of wiiu titles worth owning, thus no reason for the wiiu to exist.
See. It's this negativity that causes developers not want to release games. Support for the N64 was bad and it just got worse. And who's fault is it? It's the fans. We didn't bitch at the developers when they started releasing fewer games, nor did we bitch when they started releasing shovelware titles. And now, we're not bitching at them at all, even though there is such a lack of games and that pisses us off to no end. And people call themselves fans. All they do is criticize Nintendo for their bad business plans and underpowered machine. If only people would divert their energies from bashing Nintendo towards getting them to release games for the U, it might have a fighting chance.
(also osirisjem)
Okay...I see what you guys are saying, but I think you've got things put upside down. I honestly don't believe nintendo started out with the idea that they should have backward compatibility and then created some specs for a future console. If you ask me, they looked at the knowledge and technology available to them to make the best console within their set price range. And that result just so happened to be not so different than the wii (which isn't so surprising, as they know how to build those things).
In other words: if you went to ninty's board of directors during the planning of the wiiu and you said to them "guys...I've got a plan to manufacture a more powerful console for the same price, but it will break backward compatibility"...then they would have made that console instead of what it is today. It's just...I don't think anyone did come up with such a plan.
Oh, and I'd like to file the existence of the family wii and the wii mini as fucking evidence that nintendo themselves weren't sure the wiiu would have backward compatibility.
Which is totally why they invested a great deal of money and time on refining PPC7xx by adding an ARM core for background OS functionality and SIMD which is poor/non-existant on standard PPC7xx, miniaturizing the chip and putting three cores in it. No, this is no coincidence. The research on this CPU line is on-going, they knew exactly what they were doing. They keep re-using the same IBM setup since the Gamecube days, this was a planned and deliberate design choice. You can't really expect anyone to believe that re-using the same architecture and a backwards-compatible GPU family was entirely accidental.
No. Revisions of hardware are normal - companies release them on a regular basis.
N64 failed NOT because of fan bitching.
First of, N64 is the strongest console during fifth generation. In terms of spec it blows PS1 out of water. But it was lacking in RAM size, making it extremely hard for developers to develop game at. To make it worst it still uses cartridge as opposed to optical disc. That seriously limits the amount of content developers can put on it, as cartridge is much more expensive per megabyte. One example is Resident Evil 2 N64 port, where background and cut scene quality are inferior than PS1 due to being overly compressed to fit 2 CD size data into 64 MB cartridge. Developers and publisher much prefer optical disc, since it has more freedom in developing and cost far less to produce.
Finally, N64 entered the competition too late, by then PS1 had already have many developers lined up for it.
N64 failed because of bad system design and too late in the game.
Fair enough.
It had more RAM than the PS1 and even more with the Expansion Pak. You're thinking of texture buffers.
That was a terrible design choice indeed.
Yep. Cartridge games at that point in time were just too expensive.
Also true.
Wii had more complete BC than PS3 or 360, and it was the most popular console of its gen.
I'm glad WiiU is BC, means I'm not stuck playing my Wii games over 480p component. I can play them in upscaled 1080p HDMI or use the gamepad screen. Either way looks much better than playing on my Wii.
Yada yada yada; I've heard how Nintendo always has the most powerful systems. But they get penalized for trying to prevent their games from being pirated. And this business venture gave them a double whammy when developers stopped making games for the Wii (at least good ones). And, the cartridges/mini discs were hacked. If you ask me, I'm sure the developers bear a grudge against Nintendo and are unwilling to forgive them for their past mistakes. And then the fans complain because the developers won't release any games for Nintendo. So, people that bought a Wii played GameCube titles, so people who buy a WiiU can play GameCube and Wii titles. And the shop channel is still in place for those classic games.
D
Dork
Guest
Truly next-gen? Like the also outdated Xbox One and PS4? Yeah, I'll take the backwards compatibilty.
I don't have a WiiU.
I may get a WiiU in the future
I would definitely not get a WiiU if it didn't support Wii games.
Trouble is, I'm far from a typical customer so my opinion doesn't really count in the grand scheme of things
Anyway I think Fox4 summed it up perfectly. If it *can* be implemented then great, but you should not design your console based around it.
But really there was no need for WiiU to go with the same architecture just to maintain backwards compatibility. They could have gone x86 and developed an emulator. Dolphin is already pretty good on x86, and Nintendo would have had all the resources available to implement some serious high-level emulation to get a decent speed on even a mid range x86 cpu. Fact is it's surely far cheaper R&D wise to evolve an existing architecture than to go with something new. And they are paying the price for that now.
I may get a WiiU in the future
I would definitely not get a WiiU if it didn't support Wii games.
Trouble is, I'm far from a typical customer so my opinion doesn't really count in the grand scheme of things
Anyway I think Fox4 summed it up perfectly. If it *can* be implemented then great, but you should not design your console based around it.
But really there was no need for WiiU to go with the same architecture just to maintain backwards compatibility. They could have gone x86 and developed an emulator. Dolphin is already pretty good on x86, and Nintendo would have had all the resources available to implement some serious high-level emulation to get a decent speed on even a mid range x86 cpu. Fact is it's surely far cheaper R&D wise to evolve an existing architecture than to go with something new. And they are paying the price for that now.
Well but aren't game developers tweaking their existing architecture instead of creating something new? The Wii U is just as powerful as the PS3 and 360, so why not use that engine for designing games? They will still be able to make games for the PS4 and Xbone since the U is underpowered. And the games they're making for the PS3 can be played on the PS4 too. Or are they tweaking it so they can say it'll be too hard to develop games for the U; they'll have to leave out some of the details that give the Xbone its visual quality.
Yeah, who needs backwards compatibility when you've got Call of Booty and GTA V.
