| sc94597 said: It really isn't an enormous difference. It's a typical generation difference in power, and the difference in visuals between the 3DS and Vita is definitely a generation difference. What is your skepticism based on? I showed the pics because it seems like you are mostly using intuition. Why can't that be a 10x difference? Like I said, PS Vita games have a lot more going on in just about everything, geometry, textures, shading and lighting, image quality, world detail and size, etc, etc. Sure they're not PS360 titles, but the PS360 is theoretically much more powerful than the Vita (250-300 Gflops vs. 50 Gflops) so that fits as well. Where did Iwata say their next platform will be based on the Wii U architecture? I remember him saying that it will "absorb" the Wii U's architecture, but that is not exactly the same thing. That can be done by using the Wii U's CPU as a DSP (sound chip) for example while having an X86 main CPU and an ARM chip for Handheld/Console cross-platform games. AMD has already all but confirmed that the next Nintendo platform will have an X86 chip and.or an ARM chip. “I will say that one [design win] is x86 and [another] is ARM, and at least one will [be] beyond gaming, right. But that is about as much as you going to get out me today. From the standpoint [of being] fair to [customers], it is their product, and they launch it. They are going to announce it and then […] you will find out that it is AMD’s APU that is being used in those products.” As for hardware costs, a PS4/XBO level Wii U would be gimped enough. It's not like PS4/XBO games cost that much more than AAA WIi U games, and by the time the next consoles release, Nintendo would be quite adept at HD development that they would easily be able to reduce costs of said games. Never, not even in the WIi generation, has there been more than a generation difference (power-wise) between Nintendo and its competitors. What you are claiming is that there will indeed be almost two-generations worth of difference. I just don't see that happening. |
The burden of proof is on you. Why can't that be a 2x difference? Why can't it be a 500x difference? Show me the math. You are right that I am going by intuition, as this is a matter I have no knowledge of. Showing me pretty pictures does not help me understand the numbers involved.
Aye, the 'absorbing' quote is the one I was thinking of. I remember a lot of these same things being said 4 years ago about the Wii U, that it would be impossible for it to be on the same level as the 360/PS3 while using modern parts, yet here we are. You suggest that the Wii U successor will use '2017' parts, but if it launches that year, wouldn't it be more likely to have 2015-2016 innards? The design will be set in stone for the developers and manufacturers a while before release.
Even with as little power as it had and (essentially) no internal HDD, the Wii U cost $100 too much at launch. Nintendo can't even use the power they have at their disposal now. IMO their next console will be as affordable as possible, a relatively tiny upgrade over the Wii U. If you really think 10x is "relatively tiny," I'll take it -- but in that case, why wouldn't the PS5 be a much larger improvement over the PS4?
