Maybe mistakes are good for sales like the Wii but not good for the hardcore :P

The machine is powerful enough to render whatever the other two consoles have in 1080p at 60fps and add to that, that it will stream to one controller and be linked to the tv at the same time. And they have said that it is technically possible to have more than one screen at the same time.

You won’t be able to see that much difference between Wii U and the other two next gen consoles that are coming. They will surely do more polygons, lighting and whatever than Wii U but can you make something round, rounder? Sure they will have more on screen at the same time but will we even be able too count to see the difference :P

I wonder if MS or Sony regretted that they produced these powerful machines and wished they had them less powerful at an affordable price and at minimum losses. Instead they focused on power. Maybe then they would have sold more instead of being slaughtered by a 10 year old :P

this is really depressing news, from the point of view that Nintendo wants the hard core.....

if Ps4 and Xbox720 have much better graphics the same story will be repeated and Wii U will lose all great 3rd party games

on the other hand, the bird demo and the zelda demo look better than Xbox360/Ps3 to me

I am just happy it matches 360/PS3. I honestly don't see any need to make anything more powerful than that. Keep it simple, keep it cheap, keep it reliable.

And nevertheless I'll enjoy the hell out of it!

How is the title fine when he states "The Wii u isn't dramatically more powerful than 360/ps3."  He didn't say not really powerful....  Whatever...

I think the point Miyamoto is trying to make is that the Wii U will not massively dwarf the performance of the HD twins. Likewise, unless the Xbox1080 and PS4 are coming much later than we think or plan on having a $600 price tag, they probably won't massively dwarf what the Wii U can do either, keeping the Wii U relevant for cross-platform games.

I suppose it is true if you repeat something enough times people will begin to believe that it is true. The lack of real graphical prowess didn't hurt the Wii. The lack of prowess in the successor will not be what hurts the next console. Yet now it is a major topic of concern. Look the power of the Wii is not what hurt the consoles library. Developers can always water down the graphics, remove features, and simplify the controls. What hurt the library has everything to do with how Nintendo marketed that console, and how they supported the library.

Upping the hardware isn't going to mend fences. They have alienated developers and fans alike. Attaining hardware parity, and talking about reclaiming the core is irrelevant. Nintendo simply lacks the credibility or sympathy for that matter. They have spent generations seeding discontent, and they are not going to find a receptive audience on the part of developers or core/hardcore gamers.

Let me put it in simpler terms. Does anyone on these forums honestly think that Nintendo will be able to match the competition on the core/hardcore game front? Now if you answer honestly by saying no. Then the graphics truly are irrelevant, because the gamers that might see them as a plus will have no reason to abandon a better library. Now if you answer yes I assume you think third party development is some kind of panacea. In which case I am going to ask this. What is to keep these games from being ported to other consoles. Do you really think that Nintendo is going to pony up for exclusive high end content? I haven't been seeing them do that this generation.

Anyway the whole graphical debate is pointless, because the games will be lacking. Which brings me full circle to the point that has been forgotten. It is all about the games, and not how they look. Nintendo just doesn't have the games they need.

Parity is parity. Whether gamers buy the games is one thing (but even the hideously watered-down multiplats of Wii found an audience, so multiplats with something close to feature parity or, as is likely when coming from the 7th-gen consoles, bonus features, will likely do well enough), but the financial landscape of large-scale software development has given hardware makers a Field of Dreams scenario: If you build it within something resembling specifications, they will come. They don't have a choice in the matter

The only other question would be, of course, why should people with no interest in Nintendo games buy a console that's getting games they can get on the PS3 or 360 that they already own? That is the more daunting issue now, but will become less so when Wii U is suddenly the better-entrenched, more affordable alternative by the time the others come to play between holidays 2012 and 2013.

The question is if all these efforts will cause Nintendo to lose sight of the more important market here....

Just as a note, I find it odd that the same people who were saying before E3 "HD console graphics are fine, and there is no reason for an upgrade for many years" are now say that the Wii U is garbage because it is suggested that it will have similar performance ...


With that said, I would like to see someone like John Carmack talk about the Wii U's capabilities because what one person means by "not more powerful" might not be what I mean by "not more powerful". It could be argued that the XBox and Wii were not significantly more powerful than the Dreamcast because the output resolutions, graphical techniques used, and overall results are similar.

me too, Nintendo's games is alone make Wii U great

but having to buy only one console wouldn't matter : P

I don't want to buy Wii U and Ps4 for example like Wii and Ps3, i mean just Wii U would be more practical, I just hope Wii U gets the 3rd party games