| Soundwave said: Iwata already said they don't see a future in pursuing higher and higher end graphics because the cost to develop games will out weigh the possible return in most cases. |
If that were true, 3rd parties would have been more likely to abandon PS4/Xbox 720 to make games for Wii U due to lower costs. Instead they are already abandoning the Wii U and workin on next gen games for PS4/Xbox 720. His theory isn't translating well in the real world.
If Wii U's games compared to PS4/720 look like Xbox 360 vs. PC today, people are going to think really hard before spending $300-350 on the Wii U:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a3eilZRlyk
Nintendo is going to need to drop the price to $229-249 by Q2 2014 I bet. By holiday 2014, I can see places like Costco having the Basic Wii U for $199, unless Nintendo launches the some amazing 1st party line-up of games we've seen during SNES/N64 days.
| ninjablade said: dont forget being green is more important then power, and who the heck hides there specs like nintendo, too embarressed to show there specs. |
They are being green in the wrong places. The main console's typical power consumption is 35W, but the GamePad's battery is too small, lasting 4.5-5 hours. There is clearly room to fit a larger battery in the controller. Also, with expected die shrinks to lower manufacturing nodes/technologies, the Wii U could have always lowered the power consumption. They should have at least went with an AMD APU design with a 65W TDP. I can understand their choices to focus on lower-spec components to save power, but the console costs $350, which is WAY too expensive since its GPU power is barely better than that of a $199 Xbox 360! Nintendo is asking us to pay $150 more today for promise of future 1st party games.
What's going to happen when MS and Sony launch Xbox 720/PS4 and drop the price of the 250GB Xbox 360/PS3 to $199?
