Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Now Wii U Is Less Powerful Than PS3/360? This Is Getting Stupid!

I think this is a matter of people who look at the empirical quantitative data versus those who try to predict a trend without regarding such information, based on other factors. How about we form an educated guess based on both factors.

Currently, it is quite obvious that the Wii U is without a doubt better endowed than any current generation console. These anonymous sources do not contest the countless other sources that contradict such statements. They do not contest the quantitative information about the Wii U's abilities either. The possibility that the Wii U is not as powerful as current generation consoles is not what Nintendo fans or even objective observers are arguing against. It is a matter of its inconsistency with what we already know. Currently, and probably indefinitely, it is quite obvious these statements are paradoxical with what we know about the Wii U.

In regards to the other arguments involving the price of the console, it is illogical to think a controller, rather than a single entity within itself, will be substantially more expensive to produce and sell for "a" profit with a reasonable price-range. The hardware of the Wii U doesn't seem exceptionally new nor expensive, and from what we can tell from Nintendo's past, they tend to make the best use of the cheapest technology possible to maximize a profit. Furthermore, it is illogical to believe the competitors will be much different. As third parties target more and more consoles with their games, essentially increasing the ratio of multiplatform to exclusive games, so will companies worry less about the objective value and power of their console. They'll choose other, more preferential ways to make their console, and therefore their version of the games, unique. This is especially since development costs have not been able to viably keep up with hardware advancements.

On the other side of this argument, Nintendo will not choose to make a substantially weak console and miss out on these third party investments. That is one mistake they did not foresee with the Wii and I am sure they have learned from it.

In the end the overwhelming majority of information we have seen points in one direction. The Wii U is a generation leap in terms of concrete advancements. It might not be as much of a leap as the more powerful consoles of the 6th to 7th generations, but it seems agreeable among the credible gaming industry that it is a significantly, albeit not excessively, more powerful console than the current generation. Furthermore, the competitors will not be as distinct in terms of concrete power in relation to the Wii U. They'll maintain an affordability they hadn't targetted during the 7th generation. In the end, we will see something along the lines of the 6th generation in power differences. The only argument I can see left is whether or not the Wii U vs Ps4 vs Nextbox will be more of a Dreamcast vs Gamecube/Xbox in ability or a PS2 vs Gamecube/Xbox in terms of ability. That is a matter of specifics.

Around the Network
Player1x3 said:
archbrix said:
Player1x3 said:
theRepublic said:
Player1x3 said

Don't forget the DS.

The fact remains tho, PS2 beats GC and any other console alone easily buisness wise

Have you ever heard of a console known as "Wii"?  It is why those blue bars on the right side of the graph are 2 to 4 times taller than everything else.


Yes and it has nothing to do with DS or Wii Fit or anything else. PS2 is near 160 M untis sold worldwide, has sold over billion units of software. Its also likely to stay on market even after PS4 launches !!! Wii will struggle to pass 115M and survive 2 years on market after Wii U is released

Nobody is denying the PS2's stellar sales, 3rd party support, or staying power in the market.  But when you said "business wise", we assume you mean as a profitable endeavor for the company.  And in that respect the Wii definitely beats the PS2.


I doubt that. I believe most of Nintendo s profits came from insanely high DS sales, very successful wii accessories, and very very VERY successful software, Wii's hardware profits had little to do with it. Sony however, is a hardcore hardware company and their 1st party wasn't as strong as today so their profits relay mostly on their hardware

I'm not taking the DS profits into consideration, just the Wii alone...

Wii Fit (the balance board), Wii accessories, games, etc are part of the profits concerning the Wii, same as the PS2's controllers, accessories, and games are to PS2.  It is erroneous to compare only harware, but for the sake of argument, let's compare:  The PS2 hardware sold at a loss at launch (I've seen conflicting reports as to how much; some say over $100 per unit, others as low as $50).  In any case, the Wii hardware has been pure profit for Nintendo since day 1.  Use logic:  In the discussion between you and Viper1, you even conceded that the PS2, while still out-profiting the GC, didn't do so nearly as much as you thought.  Now factor in how much more profitable the Wii hardware has been for Nintendo than the GC hardware...

Wii definitely beats PS2 in profit, no question.  You would be incorrect to assume otherwise.




Player1x3 said:
theRepublic said:

Have you ever heard of a console known as "Wii"?  It is why those blue bars on the right side of the graph are 2 to 4 times taller than everything else.

Yes and it has nothing to do with DS or Wii Fit or anything else. PS2 is near 160 M untis sold worldwide, has sold over billion units of software. Its also likely to stay on market even after PS4 launches !!! Wii will struggle to pass 115M and survive 2 years on market after Wii U is released

Wii Fit is a game for the Wii.  You realize that right?

Yes, the DS was very successful for Nintendo.  No one is denying that.  However, once the Wii launched, hardware and software went through the roof for Nintendo.  Sony just didn't make nearly as much money as Nintendo.



My Backlog - The Countdown to Current Gen
Unstarted Games:       
Started / Completed Games:

Buy Fluidity!  One of the best games on WiiWare!

 

When trying to predict anything Nintendo, you must attempt to think from their fiscal views.  Obviously, their goal is to keep the price down, so do not expect a console priced higher than $299. *Had the 3ds succeeded at $250, then we maybe we could have expected a $350 Wii, but that didn't happen*. The good news is, a $299 price point will not affect the graphical upgrade *most* fans are want/expecting.  Now, the 4gb xbox 360 is $199...  If we follow logic & expect a modern, more efficient, moderate power boost for Wii U, + $50 Upad ($70-75 sold separately),  & pack in lite demo game, = BOOM $299.  

With 100 million Wiis sold, & more than double wii motes sold, do not expect wiimote+ & nunchuk to be packed in, lets not forget the upad has every wiimote functionality.  So, Wii mote+s, nunchuks, and HDD will all be sold separately.  The only way I can see the Wii U being as powerful or weaker than the HD twins is if Ninty aims for that $250 launch the original Wii launched with.  I don't see that personally, since Wii at the time was a "risk". Fast forward to the present, Wii was a great success approaching 100 mil sold, and folks are eager for a new, HD version with new interface. Folks will pay more. How much? Ninty will find the balance, and $299 seems perfect. 

To conclude I'm not worried about the "WiiK" rumors anymore, if by any small chance that happens, then "**** U" I'm just gonna blow my loot on a gaming tablet.



IBM Embedded Dynamic Random Access Memory
  • IBM Embedded Dynamic Random Access Memory

    Date added: 07 Jun 2011

    IBM's embedded dynamic random access memory (test chip shown here) will help deliver a thrilling new game experience to Nintendo fans. The new memory technology, a key element of the new Power microprocessor that IBM is building for the Nintendo Wii U console, can triple the amount of memory contained on a single chip, making for extreme game play.

 

http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/photo/34681.wss




Around the Network
Player1x3 said:
archbrix said:
Player1x3 said:
theRepublic said:
Player1x3 said:
Viper1 said:
Rafux said:
theRepublic said:

Not really.  Even during the PS2 era, Sony only made more than Nintendo one year.  Then there is the Wii/DS era...

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=123850

That includes Gameboy Advance data.

And PS1 (which still sold well into the PS2 era) and PSP.

Don't forget the DS.

The fact remains tho, PS2 beats GC and any other console alone easily buisness wise

Have you ever heard of a console known as "Wii"?  It is why those blue bars on the right side of the graph are 2 to 4 times taller than everything else.


Yes and it has nothing to do with DS or Wii Fit or anything else. PS2 is near 160 M untis sold worldwide, has sold over billion units of software. Its also likely to stay on market even after PS4 launches !!! Wii will struggle to pass 115M and survive 2 years on market after Wii U is released

Nobody is denying the PS2's stellar sales, 3rd party support, or staying power in the market.  But when you said "business wise", we assume you mean as a profitable endeavor for the company.  And in that respect the Wii definitely beats the PS2.


I doubt that. I believe most of Nintendo s profits came from insanely high DS sales, very successful wii accessories, and very very VERY successful software, Wii's hardware profits had little to do with it. Sony however, is a hardcore hardware company and their 1st party wasn't as strong as today so their profits relay mostly on their hardware

I don't follow your logic. Sony and MS have employed a loss leader strategy. They sell hardware at a loss an try to make up the difference on software until their platform's cost can be brought down. Nintendo sells hardware for profit from day 1. Sony sold the PS2 at $125 lost initially and didn't break even on hardware until the PS2's third year on the market. Nintendo was selling the Wii makes $80 to $100 per unit at launch and because they held their $250 price point for so long that amount they made per unit increased during the Wii's first few years on the market.



archbrix said:
Player1x3 said:
archbrix said:
Player1x3 said:
theRepublic said:
Player1x3 said

Don't forget the DS.

The fact remains tho, PS2 beats GC and any other console alone easily buisness wise

Have you ever heard of a console known as "Wii"?  It is why those blue bars on the right side of the graph are 2 to 4 times taller than everything else.


Yes and it has nothing to do with DS or Wii Fit or anything else. PS2 is near 160 M untis sold worldwide, has sold over billion units of software. Its also likely to stay on market even after PS4 launches !!! Wii will struggle to pass 115M and survive 2 years on market after Wii U is released

Nobody is denying the PS2's stellar sales, 3rd party support, or staying power in the market.  But when you said "business wise", we assume you mean as a profitable endeavor for the company.  And in that respect the Wii definitely beats the PS2.


I doubt that. I believe most of Nintendo s profits came from insanely high DS sales, very successful wii accessories, and very very VERY successful software, Wii's hardware profits had little to do with it. Sony however, is a hardcore hardware company and their 1st party wasn't as strong as today so their profits relay mostly on their hardware

I'm not taking the DS profits into consideration, just the Wii alone...

Wii Fit (the balance board), Wii accessories, games, etc are part of the profits concerning the Wii, same as the PS2's controllers, accessories, and games are to PS2.  It is erroneous to compare only harware, but for the sake of argument, let's compare:  The PS2 hardware sold at a loss at launch (I've seen conflicting reports as to how much; some say over $100 per unit, others as low as $50).  In any case, the Wii hardware has been pure profit for Nintendo since day 1.  Use logic:  In the discussion between you and Viper1, you even conceded that the PS2, while still out-profiting the GC, didn't do so nearly as much as you thought.  Now factor in how much more profitable the Wii hardware has been for Nintendo than the GC hardware...

Wii definitely beats PS2 in profit, no question.  You would be incorrect to assume otherwise.


You would have saved yourself a lot more time if you read the part of my post where i said ''hardware alone''. That means NO accessories, NO game add-ons, NO software of any kind <---- and that's where nintendo made most of its profits. Not to mention, DS was selling like 300-400k per week back then. And Sony has been profiting from PS2 for almost 10 years now. And the profit Nintendo made during PS2 era, GC hardware alone accounted for only 10% of that MAX. Most money came from GBA, GameBoy, Pokemon sales and GC software



...seriously...stop making threads like this.

Arguing these types of topics is the entire goal of trolls and fanboys. You give there arguments validity by trying to argue against their baselessness.

Player1x3 said:
archbrix said:
Player1x3 said:
archbrix said:

Nobody is denying the PS2's stellar sales, 3rd party support, or staying power in the market.  But when you said "business wise", we assume you mean as a profitable endeavor for the company.  And in that respect the Wii definitely beats the PS2.


I doubt that. I believe most of Nintendo s profits came from insanely high DS sales, very successful wii accessories, and very very VERY successful software, Wii's hardware profits had little to do with it. Sony however, is a hardcore hardware company and their 1st party wasn't as strong as today so their profits relay mostly on their hardware

I'm not taking the DS profits into consideration, just the Wii alone...

Wii Fit (the balance board), Wii accessories, games, etc are part of the profits concerning the Wii, same as the PS2's controllers, accessories, and games are to PS2.  It is erroneous to compare only harware, but for the sake of argument, let's compare:  The PS2 hardware sold at a loss at launch (I've seen conflicting reports as to how much; some say over $100 per unit, others as low as $50).  In any case, the Wii hardware has been pure profit for Nintendo since day 1.  Use logic:  In the discussion between you and Viper1, you even conceded that the PS2, while still out-profiting the GC, didn't do so nearly as much as you thought.  Now factor in how much more profitable the Wii hardware has been for Nintendo than the GC hardware...

Wii definitely beats PS2 in profit, no question.  You would be incorrect to assume otherwise.


You would have saved yourself a lot more time if you read the part of my post where i said ''hardware alone''. That means NO accessories, NO game add-ons, NO software of any kind <---- and that's where nintendo made most of its profits. Not to mention, DS was selling like 300-400k per week back then. And Sony has been profiting from PS2 for almost 10 years now. And the profit Nintendo made during PS2 era, GC hardware alone accounted for only 10% of that MAX. Most money came from GBA, GameBoy, Pokemon sales and GC software

You would have saved yourself a lot of time if you had read my post more carefully...

I did address hardware alone... and Wii comes out ahead in profit.




Around the Network
archbrix said:
Player1x3 said:
archbrix said:
Player1x3 said:
archbrix said:

Nobody is denying the PS2's stellar sales, 3rd party support, or staying power in the market.  But when you said "business wise", we assume you mean as a profitable endeavor for the company.  And in that respect the Wii definitely beats the PS2.


I doubt that. I believe most of Nintendo s profits came from insanely high DS sales, very successful wii accessories, and very very VERY successful software, Wii's hardware profits had little to do with it. Sony however, is a hardcore hardware company and their 1st party wasn't as strong as today so their profits relay mostly on their hardware

I'm not taking the DS profits into consideration, just the Wii alone...

Wii Fit (the balance board), Wii accessories, games, etc are part of the profits concerning the Wii, same as the PS2's controllers, accessories, and games are to PS2.  It is erroneous to compare only harware, but for the sake of argument, let's compare:  The PS2 hardware sold at a loss at launch (I've seen conflicting reports as to how much; some say over $100 per unit, others as low as $50).  In any case, the Wii hardware has been pure profit for Nintendo since day 1.  Use logic:  In the discussion between you and Viper1, you even conceded that the PS2, while still out-profiting the GC, didn't do so nearly as much as you thought.  Now factor in how much more profitable the Wii hardware has been for Nintendo than the GC hardware...

Wii definitely beats PS2 in profit, no question.  You would be incorrect to assume otherwise.


You would have saved yourself a lot more time if you read the part of my post where i said ''hardware alone''. That means NO accessories, NO game add-ons, NO software of any kind <---- and that's where nintendo made most of its profits. Not to mention, DS was selling like 300-400k per week back then. And Sony has been profiting from PS2 for almost 10 years now. And the profit Nintendo made during PS2 era, GC hardware alone accounted for only 10% of that MAX. Most money came from GBA, GameBoy, Pokemon sales and GC software

You would have saved yourself a lot of time if you had read my post more carefully...

I did address hardware alone... and Wii comes out ahead in profit.

Basic logic, at times too hard to grasp.