By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Rumor: Cafe has 8 GB internal storage, maybe no 1080p

leatherhat said:

Terrible idead, 8GB is way too smal- no way around it. And the console should be powerful enough for all games to be 1080p. Afterall, this will compete with PS4 and 720- not ps3 and 360. 


PS4/720 probably wont' do 1080p all the time. Its just not necessary and certainly doesn't have a good ROI. Most people wouldn't even notice a difference between 720p and 1080p and especially won't notice if it were 1080i.



Around the Network

8gb is fine by me as long as it is expandable and one is able to play games from SD cards.

I just don't want a Wii like situtation where it had only 512mb memory and even though it was expandable, until 2009 I couldn't play games directly from there.




kitler53 said:

8 Gb is too small, i had to upgrade to 500 Gb just to manage.  not that everyone need 500 Gb but 8 is really too small for most people.  remember, if the wii 2 gets third party support that mean required game installs as that is pretty common now-a-days.

1080p would be amazing but honestly i never expect the wii2 to get there.  even when the ps360 make the jump into the next gen at significantly more power than the wii2 i'd wager many of the games will run at sub 1080p.

how much did that 500 gb cost you?

how much is a 100gb difference cost in terms of ps3 and 360 versions?

I would much rather buy my own external HD, or use the one i'm using for other things than have to fork over another $100 for 100 gb



kitler53 said:

8 Gb is too small, i had to upgrade to 500 Gb just to manage.  not that everyone need 500 Gb but 8 is really too small for most people.  remember, if the wii 2 gets third party support that mean required game installs as that is pretty common now-a-days.

Only on the PS3, and that's because the blu-ray drive isn't fast enough to compete with the DVD drive in the 360. If Nintendo can match the 360 in disc drive speed, they won't need installs.



superchunk said:
leatherhat said:

Terrible idead, 8GB is way too smal- no way around it. And the console should be powerful enough for all games to be 1080p. Afterall, this will compete with PS4 and 720- not ps3 and 360. 


PS4/720 probably wont' do 1080p all the time. Its just not necessary and certainly doesn't have a good ROI. Most people wouldn't even notice a difference between 720p and 1080p and especially won't notice if it were 1080i.


You act like its a difficult thing to do. 1080p games are nothing and all next gen consoles should be able to do it without question. 



ǝןdɯıs ʇı dǝǝʞ oʇ ǝʞıן ı ʍouʞ noʎ 

Ask me about being an elitist jerk

Time for hype

Around the Network

LOL Kotaku.



leatherhat said:
superchunk said:
leatherhat said:

Terrible idead, 8GB is way too smal- no way around it. And the console should be powerful enough for all games to be 1080p. Afterall, this will compete with PS4 and 720- not ps3 and 360. 


PS4/720 probably wont' do 1080p all the time. Its just not necessary and certainly doesn't have a good ROI. Most people wouldn't even notice a difference between 720p and 1080p and especially won't notice if it were 1080i.


You act like its a difficult thing to do. 1080p games are nothing and all next gen consoles should be able to do it without question. 

I would think that creating visual artifacts in 720p is definitely a cost reduction over creating them in 1080p. Since the greater majority of consumers don't notice much, if any, difference, there is no reason to spend the extra costs.

Why do you think a HD game costs so much more to build than a SD game? Well, that same increase will be between 720p and 1080p and to a lesser extant 1080i. Its not just horsepower. So its not a question of IF all three next gens console could potentially do it, but IF the publishers/devs want to add the extra costs. I vote they won't.

Hell, I'm pretty sure PS360 are already capable of native 1080p, yet nearly every game out is based on native 720p.



irstupid said:
kitler53 said:

8 Gb is too small, i had to upgrade to 500 Gb just to manage.  not that everyone need 500 Gb but 8 is really too small for most people.  remember, if the wii 2 gets third party support that mean required game installs as that is pretty common now-a-days.

1080p would be amazing but honestly i never expect the wii2 to get there.  even when the ps360 make the jump into the next gen at significantly more power than the wii2 i'd wager many of the games will run at sub 1080p.

how much did that 500 gb cost you?

how much is a 100gb difference cost in terms of ps3 and 360 versions?

I would much rather buy my own external HD, or use the one i'm using for other things than have to fork over another $100 for 100 gb

500 Gb was like $40 when i bought it (ps3 uses standard laptop drives).  360 would be a lot more as they use propreitery drives.



superchunk said:
leatherhat said:
superchunk said:
leatherhat said:

Terrible idead, 8GB is way too smal- no way around it. And the console should be powerful enough for all games to be 1080p. Afterall, this will compete with PS4 and 720- not ps3 and 360. 


PS4/720 probably wont' do 1080p all the time. Its just not necessary and certainly doesn't have a good ROI. Most people wouldn't even notice a difference between 720p and 1080p and especially won't notice if it were 1080i.


You act like its a difficult thing to do. 1080p games are nothing and all next gen consoles should be able to do it without question. 

I would think that creating visual artifacts in 720p is definitely a cost reduction over creating them in 1080p. Since the greater majority of consumers don't notice much, if any, difference, there is no reason to spend the extra costs.

Why do you think a HD game costs so much more to build than a SD game? Well, that same increase will be between 720p and 1080p and to a lesser extant 1080i. Its not just horsepower. So its not a question of IF all three next gens console could potentially do it, but IF the publishers/devs want to add the extra costs. I vote they won't.

Available resolution is decided by the hardware. Its not a major cost for games to be displayed in 1080p vs 720p. Hell, PC games have been doing it for years and years. 



ǝןdɯıs ʇı dǝǝʞ oʇ ǝʞıן ı ʍouʞ noʎ 

Ask me about being an elitist jerk

Time for hype

kitler53 said:
irstupid said:
kitler53 said:

8 Gb is too small, i had to upgrade to 500 Gb just to manage.  not that everyone need 500 Gb but 8 is really too small for most people.  remember, if the wii 2 gets third party support that mean required game installs as that is pretty common now-a-days.

1080p would be amazing but honestly i never expect the wii2 to get there.  even when the ps360 make the jump into the next gen at significantly more power than the wii2 i'd wager many of the games will run at sub 1080p.

how much did that 500 gb cost you?

how much is a 100gb difference cost in terms of ps3 and 360 versions?

I would much rather buy my own external HD, or use the one i'm using for other things than have to fork over another $100 for 100 gb

500 Gb was like $40 when i bought it (ps3 uses standard laptop drives).  360 would be a lot more as they use propreitery drives.

hmm well either way.  i know i bought a terabyte drive for like $75 a little over a year ago for my friends wedding gift. 

pretty sure that works on the 360 and ps3 as well as computers. 

and if i recal it seems every model of 360 and ps3 is always like $100 difference or so.  And what has been the most HD space they gave us?  like 300 or something.  or is it only 160?  i dont' know, but either way its been nowhere near 1,000.  And they will price say 80 gb at 300 and 160 gb at 400.  Sorry but how the hell is 80 gb worth $100?

edit: that is essentailly what i'm saying and why i have no beef with only 8gb.  i kno we would be getting ripped off if they included one themselves.  and i can use my 1 tb on the 360/ps3/wii2 and my pc. if its onboard the wii2, then it can ONLY Be used for that