| Mazty said: “The Wii U is an infant that’s just been born. It’s a little unfair to compare it to mature platforms that people have been working on for over five years." Not really. When the 360 came out PGR3 blew everything else out of the water in terms of graphics. If the Wii U wants to prove itself as being next gen, then it needs a title that clearly does this. In terms of efficiency it's clearly next gen shaving 100W off the load of the 360, but which gamer really cares about that? |
This coming from someone with a sig boasting his broadband connection speed is unsurprising. Nintendo clearly is not targeting the spec possessed market and if you want to model yourself after what makes a system popular, there's PS2 for true global reach and Wii for blue ocean stratefy. Xbox360 had the most power? but it likely will end up as the least number sold globally? (Here's rooting for PS3?).
Wii U from a spec standpoint is not next gen that also was already stated by Team Ninja. SUVs innovated not from a hp and torque perspective. Toyota's hybrid cars use innovation along side time proven (and decade old) gas engines. There is more than one way to innovate. There is no need to beat the same dead horse about Wii not graphically up to par of the nextgen HDTwins. No one needs to prove anything there, it's a simple choice made.
This is not like Intel vs AMD, Nvidia vs AMD, Ferrari vs Lambo, the "engineers" at Nintendo are not trying to outclass Sony's or MSfTs. Sony and MSFT were forced into following Nintendo's lead during the Wii generation. Innovation came at the motion controller end. The Wii U generation is a renewed emphasis on family room gaming, 5 players with one in control of a touch controll second screen. Let's see if Sony's Playstation magic returns, or if MSFT core corporate value of let's copy other people's success pays off.
