Nintendo Responds to Concerns of Wii U Power

[Just Another Gamer]

I think thats the concern of alot of people who are hoping the WiiU turns out really good.

Well Nintendo has at least made the first step towards supporting third parties and made the system actually goddamn port-able.

Not "portable" like a 3DS, but it can actually get multiplats for once. Graphically it can handle it and it has two analog sticks and some buttons. It probably won't take that much effort elsewhere to add in some touchscreen menus and there ya go, one multiplat down.

The big issue though is that if new platforms come out that do outrank it in a Wii-to-Xbox 360/PS3 way, it'll be stuck in the worst kind of limbo. It came too late in the Xbox 360/PS3's lifespan to get their multiplats and it's too behind technology to get all the new multiplats. It'll have perhaps some third parties who make exclusives for it but it won't see the same third party success as the Xbox 360/PS3. Why develop a game for one console when you can develop the same game and reach the audiences of three consoles (Xbox 720, PS4, and PC)?

Well the WiiU when compared to the Wii can handle multiplats more which is always a good thing but unfortunately the problem I see is because nintendo released it to early and when the new Xbox and PS4 is released late into the WiiU's life its specs will be too behind for alot of multiplats as it had before and start losing support and it will then get the rare third party game like the Wii.

 

[the_randomizer]

Well it's good to know that Nintendo fans always shoot down the rumors and never accept them as fact.

What are we supposed to do, accept all rumors and BS that developers crap out of their rectums as truth? Do you know anyone who knows the system specifications of the Wii U? Anyone who thinks they'll be as bad as the Wii is sorely mistaken.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Well it's good to know that Nintendo fans always shoot down the rumors and never accept them as fact.

What are we supposed to do, accept all rumors and BS that developers crap out of their rectums as truth?

I was just stating that Nintendo fans will shoot down the rumors about the Wii U that they don't like but they'll accept the rumors that the next Sony and Microsoft consoles will have extensive measures to prevent used game sales.

It's perfectly reasonable to deny the Wii U rumors but to accept the equally unfounded "used games" ones is rather stupid.

 

[DSGamer64]

I don't believe any rumours suggesting that the Wii U is less powerful then the 360 and PS3, the announced technology suggests that it's processing power is at least on par with the other consoles and that the graphics technology is twice as capable of running more advanced visual settings that the PS3 and 360 lack due to old tech.

 

[the_randomizer]

I was just stating that Nintendo fans will shoot down the rumors about the Wii U that they don't like but they'll accept the rumors that the next Sony and Microsoft consoles will have extensive measures to prevent used game sales.

It's perfectly reasonable to deny the Wii U rumors but to accept the equally unfounded "used games" ones is rather stupid.

I guess that's true, the whole used game countermeasure crap is getting out of hand. Even if it is true, people will find a way around that and circumvent the draconian DRM.

 

[DSGamer64]

I think thats the concern of alot of people who are hoping the WiiU turns out really good.

Well Nintendo has at least made the first step towards supporting third parties and made the system actually goddamn port-able.

Not "portable" like a 3DS, but it can actually get multiplats for once. Graphically it can handle it and it has two analog sticks and some buttons. It probably won't take that much effort elsewhere to add in some touchscreen menus and there ya go, one multiplat down.

The big issue though is that if new platforms come out that do outrank it in a Wii-to-Xbox 360/PS3 way, it'll be stuck in the worst kind of limbo. It came too late in the Xbox 360/PS3's lifespan to get their multiplats and it's too behind technology to get all the new multiplats. It'll have perhaps some third parties who make exclusives for it but it won't see the same third party success as the Xbox 360/PS3. Why develop a game for one console when you can develop the same game and reach the audiences of three consoles (Xbox 720, PS4, and PC)?

Well the WiiU when compared to the Wii can handle multiplats more which is always a good thing but unfortunately the problem I see is because nintendo released it to early and when the new Xbox and PS4 is released late into the WiiU's life its specs will be too behind for alot of multiplats as it had before and start losing support and it will then get the rare third party game like the Wii.

No it won't. Graphics technology is at a stagnant point right now and realism is not much of the issue, it's all the other visual display issues that neither the 360 or PS3 can do. It's like comparing DirectX9 games at maximum settings to DirectX10 or 11 games at maximum settings. Games running DX10 or 11 have a lot more textures, better frame rates and true HD resolutions, whereas the PS3 and 360 are running games with less texturing, inferior or non existent shaders and lower resolutions just to get 30 FPS on newer games. If the Wii U is running the right kind of graphics chip, which an R770 should be more then enough, newer games would be capable of running in true 1080p with at least 30 FPS and more advanced shaders and textures.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

I guess that's true, the whole used game countermeasure crap is getting out of hand. Even if it is true, people will find a way around that and circumvent the draconian DRM.

DRM is dying anyway, every company is saying its terribly impractical and it in fact encourages more piracy than anything else.

Implementing good multiplayer modes and methods of policing multiplayer activity is the best way to do it, like Microsoft cutting down hacked Xbox 360's from online play for example (well, they used to be able to). It's not really "draconian" and it doesn't hurt the average consumer in the process.

 

[DiscostewSM]

Well it's good to know that Nintendo fans always shoot down the rumors and never accept them as fact.

What are we supposed to do, accept all rumors and BS that developers crap out of their rectums as truth?

I was just stating that Nintendo fans will shoot down the rumors about the Wii U that they don't like but they'll accept the rumors that the next Sony and Microsoft consoles will have extensive measures to prevent used game sales.

It's perfectly reasonable to deny the Wii U rumors but to accept the equally unfounded "used games" ones is rather stupid.

Well, Nintendo is first to the next-gen party this time, so they are the focus right now, from both haters and fanboys alike. When Microsoft and Sony take the spotlight with rumors and such in due time about their next-gen offerings, I don't doubt we'll see the same thing happen with them. Fanboys will accept the positive, dismiss the negative, and reverse for the haters.

 

[TemplarGR]

Wii U will definitely be powerful from what we have seen so far. What is certainly lacking is Nintendo's marketing approach. Nintendo continually drops the ball in that department. This response is exactly what the anti-Nintendo party needs to fuel its FUD-campaign. While i can certainly understand that they do not want to reveal much information so early, they should reply in a more positive way to such concerns. There is no possible way they can produce a console weaker than a PS3 at this point, unless they target a 100$ price range...

As i said in the previous thread, leaked specs that you can see at Wikipedia (among other sources) reveal that the Wii U will be at least 2x times more powerful than a PS3(while easier to program and thus to unlock its potential). While not exactly a revolution in the graphical department, it will be enough for most people. Nintendo's strategy will be the same as last gen: Provide adequate graphics for the majority of TVs(which at the time of Wii's introduction were mostly SDTVs) while innovating in the control and gameplay department. Last gen was motion control, this gen will be about touch screen controller, which unlocks many possibilities both for control and gameplay we haven't even think of yet...

So stop worrying, and wait for the final product...

 

[TemplarGR]

I was just stating that Nintendo fans will shoot down the rumors about the Wii U that they don't like but they'll accept the rumors that the next Sony and Microsoft consoles will have extensive measures to prevent used game sales.

It's perfectly reasonable to deny the Wii U rumors but to accept the equally unfounded "used games" ones is rather stupid.

This is a straw-man. You try to attack Nintendo fans, who state that this rumour is probably false because we have heard otherwise from plentiful and more reputable sources, by saying that they do not debunk rumours that affect other companies also...

1) Not all Nintendo fans believe the rumours that Sony and Microsoft will strongly prevent used games, and you have no means to know exactly the percentage of those who do...

2) It is irrelevant to this discussion anyway, because each rumour should be discussed on its own merits. It may be the case that the anti-used rumour is more possible and with fewer sources to counter it.

For example, i definitely believe that it is possible that there will be anti-used games methods this gen. And you know why? Because there were last gen too... They were called "Day 0 Free/Paid DLCs"... Where a noticable part of the game is linked to an account, so a potential buyer should have less incentive to buy used, or at least to pay a sum for the DLC.

It is in the best interest of both companies to include such measures, because they will make their consoles more appealing to publishers. Publishers lose a lot of money to used games, actually when you buy used you may as well just pirate the thing, it is the same for them.

You have no serious argument to counter this rumour, you try to defeat it just on your faith and belief that "in the end Sony/MS aren't so bad...", and yet you accuse Nintendo fans for finding your counter-argument lacking... This is not the same as this rumour which can be disproved by much more sources, equally or more dependable than this one...

So yeah i happen to like Nintendo more than the other two, while i own both Nintendo (NES/Gameboy/DS/3DS) and Sony Consoles (PS1/2/PSP), and i am definetely a hardcore PC gamer for almost 15 years... That doesn't make me a blind fanboi, and the reason i tend to accept one rumour and debunk another is because i just look to the facts. Try to do the same...

 

[Slowking]

This was pretty much the same thing regarding the Wii and it not being that powerful, but then again Nintendo has never been a company about making the most powerful system, they have always been about making an affordable and functional gaming system.

Well, they were never about power. Except for everything before the Wii. Now they're the family friendly affordable one!

Going back and looking at the specs of their older systems, most of them weren't very powerful. From the looks of it, not being an expert, the gamecube is barely more powerful than the PS2, but not as powerful as the xbox.

XBOX and Gamecube were about on the same level. Both kicked the PS2s ass.
You can see the big difference between Cube and PS2 when comparing Resident Evil 4.

This was pretty much the same thing regarding the Wii and it not being that powerful, but then again Nintendo has never been a company about making the most powerful system, they have always been about making an affordable and functional gaming system.

The NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube, the original Gameboy and the Gameboy Advance beg to differ.

NES, SNES and Gameboy were all less powerfull than their Sega counterparts. GBA had no competition, so ofcourse it was more powerfull than anything else. ;p

 

[Eerpow]

So is anyone up for more Wii U rumors?

Spoiler

- Nintendo likes the name Wii U and wants to keep it, but apparently someone or some company woke up really late in the game and has been giving them trademark issues about using the letter U in the name. Because of this Nintendo have been thinking of a Plan B but I was told that it’s rare for Nintendo lose a legal battle. Whatever the outcome, Nintendo really like the name Wii and want to make sure it’s somehow part of the final name. At E3 we’ll see whatever gets settled upon over the next two months.

- The recent “rumors” about the Wii U being weaker than PS3 and 360? Apparently, they are far from the truth and Nintendo isn’t happy with the ‘analyst’ that had a vendetta against them enough to spread false rumors. The rumors apparently have scared off investors and downgraded Nintendo’s stock rating. Investors are waiting until E3 to have a better idea of what lies in store for the Wii U rather than buying in advance to E3 to have a leg up for when the hype begins to soar.

- The lead-up to the Wii U’s final reveal has been something of a roller-coaster. Nintendo made the strict NDA embargoes go far too long this time and it’s somewhat their own fault that so much confusion abounds in regard to the Wii U’s technology. But, Nintendo is hoping it will all be worth it when everything is finally announced. For now, the top-tier publishers with full access to the final dev kits are keeping their mouths shut tight even in the face of negative rumors.

- Is the release date November 18? Even if that date came from a Nintendo board meeting it’s not final. There is no set date yet. Discussions are taking place and November 18 can be the final outcome, but for now not even Nintendo has come to a conclusion.

- What about the haptics bio-feedback rumor? Apparently, it is true that Nintendo have looked into it and discussed it with the relevant companies but that doesn’t mean it’s anything concrete. I guess we’ll have to wait until E3 to see if Nintendo went with it in the end.

source

 

[Kioku]

Anyway, seeing as they said it would most likely be sold at a loss I don't see how it's going to be a weak system specwise, given that the price would be around a normal launchprice.

Which is?

 

[Eerpow]

Anyway, seeing as they said it would most likely be sold at a loss I don't see how it's going to be a weak system specwise, given that the price would be around a normal launchprice.

Which is?

Around 300 bucks, rememember that the console won't include a hardrive, it supports them but we will have to buy external drives according to Nintendo.

 

[TemplarGR]

NES, SNES and Gameboy were all less powerfull than their Sega counterparts. GBA had no competition, so ofcourse it was more powerfull than anything else. ;p

True except for SNES: It was more powerful than the Mega Drive/Genesis. While the SEGA machine had a faster cpu, SNES had more ram, a nice dedicated graphics co-processor, a better sound chip, and the ability to extend its power with "Super FX" chips inside a cartridge.

We could think of their difference as if the Mega Drive was a PC with a 2ghz CPU, 512mb ram and an integrated GPU and SNES was a PC with a 1ghz CPU, 1GB ram and a discreete GPU, plus the ability to use 1ghz co-processors for certain demanding games. Which one would you pick for gaming purposes?

 

[Foxi4]

This was pretty much the same thing regarding the Wii and it not being that powerful, but then again Nintendo has never been a company about making the most powerful system, they have always been about making an affordable and functional gaming system.

Well, they were never about power. Except for everything before the Wii. Now they're the family friendly affordable one!

Going back and looking at the specs of their older systems, most of them weren't very powerful. From the looks of it, not being an expert, the gamecube is barely more powerful than the PS2, but not as powerful as the xbox.

XBOX and Gamecube were about on the same level. Both kicked the PS2s ass.
You can see the big difference between Cube and PS2 when comparing Resident Evil 4.

This was pretty much the same thing regarding the Wii and it not being that powerful, but then again Nintendo has never been a company about making the most powerful system, they have always been about making an affordable and functional gaming system.

The NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube, the original Gameboy and the Gameboy Advance beg to differ.

NES, SNES and Gameboy were all less powerfull than their Sega counterparts. GBA had no competition, so ofcourse it was more powerfull than anything else. ;p

There is a difference between less powerful and underpowered. SNES vs Genesis is a fair fight, Wii vs PS3 is not. I clarified that earlier.

 

[DSGamer64]

Anyway, seeing as they said it would most likely be sold at a loss I don't see how it's going to be a weak system specwise, given that the price would be around a normal launchprice.

Which is?

Around 300 bucks, rememember that the console won't include a hardrive, it supports them but we will have to buy external drives according to Nintendo.

Fine by me, so long as they don't pull a Microshit fiasco and have some overpriced standardized hard drive system, I am fine with having to buy my own drive since that gives me storage options. I doubt it would be external though, that might be silly unless they are going to have USB 3.0 support, as 2.0 would be far too slow for larger games.

 

[TemplarGR]

Nintendo is a really smart company. It competes with giants, companies like Microsoft and Sony that are involved in much more lucrative sectors, and it continually beats them. SEGA, the other gaming dedicated company, couldn't compete. And let's not start with Atari etc... Nintendo survived because of its great ability to forecast the trends of the industry and "see" the future. Nintendo thinks about every investment it makes, that is what keeps this company in the game.

Wii was certainly not in the same league as the XBOX360 and the PS3 power-wise. This was a really smart decision. Most gamers aren't aware of it, but the reason those two were that powerful at that point in time and that price range, was because Microsoft wanted to "throw money" in order to gain market share. It was the same with the original XBOX. Microsoft's strategy is to lose money at first in order to gain marketshare, then make even. This was really the only way they could do this, they weren't that good at producing first party games and didn't have a strong following their competitors had. This isn't a sane longterm strategy for any company. While other companies do the same( Sony with the Vita is a recent example), Microsoft took this strategy to the extreme. Sony, with its unlimited resources, decided to compete, because at stake was something more than a gaming console: The future HD disk format... So they threw money too. They lost extreme amount of money at first. Their consoles were as powerful as midrange gaming PCs of that time, had HD diskplayers, and sold for much less... Nintendo realised that the market isn't ready for a 3rd "insane" console. The economy wouldn't support it. So they decided to let the other two burn their money and to act smart. If Nintendo had joined the madness, it would probably had the fate of SEGA today...

Another point most gamers never give much thought, is that complex games cost more to develop, take more time to develop, and are more prone to errors and bugs(*ahem* Bethesda). Having powerful specs is nice, but you need to have the resources to exploit them. Nintendo judged that the previous generation wasn't exploited enough and decided that an overclocked Gamecube was more than enough, especially since HDTVs weren't that common and were expensive. And Nintendo was right: While the XBOX360 and the PS3 were much much more powerful than their predecessors, their original games weren't that impressive... Developers simply couldn't tap their potential. Compare Oblivion graphics with Skyrim for example... There is a vast difference... Try to remember how much shovelware was released the first years, games that lacked both graphics and gameplay... Instead, the Wii was more properly exploited. Of course today it is inadequate, but 3-4 years ago was more than enough...

The same happened with the DS vs PSP battle. PSP was powerful but devs couldn't afford to tap its potential early in its lifetime, so most we got were cut-down PS2 ports. DS on the other hand had much less developing costs, so its gaming library grew much bigger, and with more interesting titles(if one didn't care only about graphics). And the same will happen with 3DS vs Vita. Vita is more powerful, though the delta is smaller than before, but 3DS is the ideal spot for developers to target. Making exclusive Vita games that unlock its potential is not profitable at this point in time...

The funny thing is that from what is revealed until today, Microsoft and Sony both decided to not repeat their mistakes of the previous generation. Nextbox and PS4 will be a less extreme jump in specs. Game devs aren't ready to support much powerful consoles. Some moderation is the best choice.

 

[Deleted_171835]

Fine by me, so long as they don't pull a Microshit fiasco and have some overpriced standardized hard drive system, I am fine with having to buy my own drive since that gives me storage options. I doubt it would be external though, that might be silly unless they are going to have USB 3.0 support, as 2.0 would be far too slow for larger games.

It'll have to be external judging by the size of the case.

 

[Slowking]

There is a difference between less powerful and underpowered. SNES vs Genesis is a fair fight, Wii vs PS3 is not. I clarified that earlier.

I was not commenting on the Wii, just correcting some incorrect information. Aperently SNES vs. Megadrive is a little controversial, though.