By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
happydolphin on 12 April 2012
Edit Thread
Viper1 said:
happydolphin said:
Viper1 said:

1 They'd eithe still take some losses or would have a price in the $400+ range.   Now for about $300, they may have been able to use a shader based GPU (again we are ignoring B/C) which could have give the Wii better on screen effects and maybe some better AA but it would still look quite far behind the other 2 consoles.

2 If we are ignoring GC G/C, a Radeon X1300 was have been a good choice.  Probably drop the clocks a little for thermals. You'd get about 3 times the power compared to the Hollywood chip.

With that point 2 plan in place, (and happysquirrel also replied to me in the other thread), how feasible would it have been to market it at a Wii pricepoint, given that the cube was priced at 199$ with its capabilities?

Not very feasible without taking major losses.

Keep in mind that the Wii remote and iother peripherals were initially planned to be released on GC as a meansw to extend its life (like MS did with Kinect) but Nintendo felt it would work better with a new console that can be better branded and better marketed than simply as GC peripherals.    This is also largley why the technology in the Wii is an extension of the technology in the GC.

I don't buy it. If they could do it with the cube, they could do it for the super Wii. I don't see why it is so different with gen 7. I understand that the PS3 was way ahead of its time, but it was bottlenecked at RAM, and the 360 wasn't so completely advanced. Nintendo should have gone with the WiiU hybrid strategy they're using for WiiU, they would've dominated the generation hands down.

Anyways, why do you consider the 360 specs so cutting edge for their time, weren't they using the same strategy as the XBox did in 2001? Since the cube competed with that I don't see how all this is so far-fetched.