I'm a Nintendo fan and I just accepted that Wii U is N64 2.

[STRYKIE]

Shadow1980 said:

FrancisNobleman said:

Not Gamecube 2, because GC was the most "normal" console by Nintendo. Quite comparable to other "classic" as in "dead boring same shit as always" consoles. N64  2, because like the N64, the Wii U is not quite in the same performance ballpark as the competitors. N64 was kind of half a gen ahead, Wii U is half a gen behind.

Both consoles came out with an interesting and different approach to what you have in your hands that was never used before as a main input for gameplay mechanics. 

N64 sold about 33 million ? And Wii U is set to sell the same ammount.

Both consoles had horrendous 3rd party support, which forced Nintendo to pump out collaborations with studios and push its own games to the platforms.

N64 was home to the first true FPS on consoles and a true 3D platformer done right.

Wii U will be home to something Nintendo will come up, that neither Sony or Microsoft can match with their tacked in tablet integration and Vita laggy stream.

 

With that said, if you are an hardcore occasional gamer, just a Wii U is gonna be fine for you. If you are an hardcore addicted son of a bitch without a life, you gonna need one more console, or PC to fullfil your gaming needs, because Wii U is just another N64.

 

The sooner you accept it, the faster you will reach inner peace, and enjoy the ride.

N64 "only half a gen behind"? The N64 was the most powerful fifth-gen system, at least on paper. It had a 64-bit processor clocked at 93.75 MHz while the PS1's CPU was 32-bit and ran at significantly slower 28.63 MHz. The N64 also had more memory, with 4 MB of RAM (expandable to 8 MB with the Expansion Pak) compared to 2 MB of RAM and 1 MB of VRAM for the PS1. The N64's GPU was also at least as good if not better than the PS1's (textures look better on the N64).

Also, Nintendo has ushered in a lot of firsts when it comes to controller design: the D-pad (NES), shoulder buttons (SNES), the diamond-shaped arrangement of face buttons (SNES again), analog sticks (N64), and accelerometers (Wii). That Nintendo is doing something revolutionary with their controller via the Wii U gamepad's touch screen (which has far more utilitarian value than motion controls) isn't something that can be compared directly to just the N64. Nintendo just likes doing new things with their controllers.

Finally, third-party support has been lacking in general for Nintendo since the fifth generation. They lost a lot of it with the N64 because they decided to stick with cartridges (many devs wanted CDs because they had more space for fancy pre-rendered FMV movies and because they were cheaper to manufacture), they couldn't regain it with the GameCube because of the PS2's utter dominance and perhaps also because of format issues (the GC used a proprietary miniDVD variant), and third parties didn't do much with the Wii because it wasn't as powerful as the 360 and PS3, a problem the Wii U faces in the eighth generation. The Wii U does get third party games just like its parent, grandparent, and great-grandparent had, but it's not getting the third-party games it needs. There's a big difference between what the Wii U is getting and what, say, the 360 got in its first year on the market, something that, among other factors, was crucial in the latter expanding MS's market share.

That being said, I do think the Wii U will end up at around N64-level sales. It will likely have middling sales in Europe and Japan, but will have a decent performance in America where Nintendo's home systems perform the strongest.

Bolded: The N64 is infamous for it's LACK of textures more than anything.