Which console launch was handled worse, PS3 or Wii U?

[Mazty]

curl-6 said:

TheJimbo1234 said:

You say bridge, me and the business world say confused.

He makes good points, though some are wrong or flawed. It isn't powerful. That's a simple fact and seeing that I know a thing or two about computing, I am right when I say it isn't powerful and has problems. The 3rd party games have problens already with gimped dev kits and poor sales. I can't see how or why this would change. But point 6 is critical. Nintendo, succeed or fail with the WiiU will last. It has the IP and captial to support this and the next 2 generations of hardware to fail.

1. This is a debate, not a childish playground spat. Rather than spouting inane retort, reason why a touch pad is a selling point.

2.Those who don't are less well off and a poor choice of target customers, and lets be honest, if you can afford a new concolse, you can afford another TV/own another gaming device (phone/tablet/laptop).

3.The PS4 is not costly. To buy the equal hardware for a PC comes in at ~ £450, and this will crash by £100 within a year, and more so afterwards. Then you factor in the bulk purchase; it's cheap.

4.Motion controls was a gimmick, not gameplay changing. Did it add depth? Nope. Allow you to do something in the game a pad wouldn't allow? Nope. Thus it added nothing bar changing how the person physically interacts with the console. That is different from being innovative within a game eg. cover mechanics, 2 weapon systems etc. This is why all major games still opt for pads, not motion controls, where as how much did Halo affect the FPS genre? See the difference?  

5. Such as??????? I could say "The ps4 will cure cancer!". Sadly, just saying so does not make it true. You have to reason why.

Unless you're a developer who's worked with the Wii U hardware, (and how could you prove it if you are?) your opinion that it's not powerful isn't going to change many people's minds. Of course rushed launch games made with crappy devkits will look bad. That doesn't mean the system is weak. Look at the PS3's early games.

1. You've forgotten what this point was even about. It was about people relating to a touchpad. In today's world, people can. They are commonplace.

2. Why buy a second TV when you already have one? Many people in this economy could afford a second TV if they wanted but don't see the point. Being able to play off screen is a valuable and convenient feature, I can just switch to the pad mid game, and still share the couch with my girlfriend.

3. 450 pounds for PC that equals PS4? Sorry, I'm going to call BS on that.

4. Motion controls did add depth. They changed the fundamental way people interact with their games, that's more significant than some relatively minor feature like differing cover mechanics or a 2 weapon limit. Being able to  interact with a virtual world with your own bodily movements was the biggest step in gaming since the shift from 2D to 3D. All major games do not opt for non-motion controls. Many Wii U and 360 games feature motion, not to mention many Wii games still selling.

5.  Nintendoland, ZombiU, and Rayman Origins give us some good ideas on what can be done with it. Then there's the potential for 6-player local splitscreen.

I actually know a dev who has and his view was that the Wii U was on par with the PS3 and 360 in terms of power. It isn't powerful:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-wii-u-graphics-power-finally-revealed

"It was ballpark speculation at the time based on what we had eyeballed at the event, but the final GPU is indeed a close match to the 4650/4670, albeit with a deficit in the number of texture-mapping units and a lower clock speed - 550MHz"

"AMD's RV770 hardware is well documented so with these numbers we can now, categorically, finally rule out any next-gen pretensions for the Wii U - the GCN hardware in Durango and Orbis is in a completely different league. "

If the Wii U was going to be successful, it wouldn't be going through such a rough time.