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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - THQ on WiiU: ''much more powerful than the other HD consoles''

oni-link said:
oniyide said:
oni-link said:
oniyide said:
oni-link said:
archbrix said:
oni-link said:
archbrix said:
HappySqurriel said:


Being that cheap Chinese manufactured LCD ebook and media players with a similar size and resolution display were selling with a MSRP of (around) $100 last Christmas, and (at worst) you could say that the components it doesn't have that the Wii U controller would need would be roughly the same cost as the components these devices have that the Wii U controller doesn't need. With this in mind, why would the Wii U controller be prohibitively expensive when the Wii U launches some-time next year?

To be clear, I'm not trying to imply that the Wii U controller would be as cheap as a conventional controller, but I also don't see why it would be $50 more expensive to manufacture than the Wiimote and Nunchuck; and (therefore) why it would require the Wii U to sell for more than $300.

I completely agree.

By the time Wii U launches, the PS3 will be able to sell at $199 without a loss.  Wii U may have an elaborate controller, but it's not a blu-ray player.

Even if it's sold at a minor loss (very minor, if at all), I can't imagine they'd price it at more than $300, particularly after the 3DS price debacle.

1.  3DS says hello!!! (though with ~$100 to manufacture it may not be losing money)
2.  POWER7 CPU and ATI R770 GPU says otherwise; so mosdef this is gonna be a beast!!!  THQ even went so far as saying it'll be like Blu-Ray vs DVD.

1.  Uh, I'm aware of 3DS... which is the very reason I cited it as an example of why Nintendo has learned (hopefully) not to price their systems too high.

2.  POWER7 and R770 don't say otherwise; where did I say the Wii U wasn't going to perform great?  The point you're missing is that they were smart with choosing components that will offer optimal performance without necessarily having an exceedingly high price tag come 2012.  

I was actually refering to oniyide's quote that Nintendo wasn't willing to take a loss or that Wii-U was not going to be more powerful than the PS3.  I am still freaking out about the main console of the Wii U packing a modified POWER7 CPU and ATI R770 GPU.  I was half expecting them to come out with console using a POWER6 or POWER5 (360's I believe) architecture along with a boosted R520 GPU.  Now if we could only find out if they are still using 1TSRAM and how much of it!!!

3DS doesnt say anything, because it did not LAUNCH at a loss. The price was dropped because people were not buying it for 250

@oni

IT DOES SAY SOMETHING since Nintendo was willing to cut the 3DS price to a loss or almost a loss (depending on who you believe) shows that Nintendo, is willing to take a hit to make a system sell!!!

true, but the price did not drop until AFTER launch. Thats why i say they will not launch WiiU for a loss, now if it does not meet expectations and they do a price drop, that i can see happening

g
I think after overpricing the 3DS they maybe willing to take a loss initially to meet sales marks.  Whether that is going to be the case or not NO ONE KNOWS for sure.  I don't even know for sure if they are losing money on the 3DS right now as Iwata's translation during the board meeting was a bit skewed.  All we know is that the 3DS cost ~$100 to manufacture during launch.  Nintendo could have re-negotiated the price or parts and what they sold to retailers since then in order to meet numbers with the price cut.  AGAIN no one knows if this is the case.  All I know is that looking at the individual pieces of the Wii U; it seems like it might be at the very least 2-3x more powerful than the PS3 looking at the CPU and GPU combination. This along with the rumored 1 GB of some RAM (probably MoSys 1-TSRAM) makes the Wii-U a very competent system!!! My only concern is the CPU and GPU and RAM that might be running the tablet could be a throw away but we still do not know how the controller works in conjunction with the main system.

 

Price prediction is $349.99-$399.99  with the controller selling for $89.99-$129.99. It is  dependent if they are gonna have PICA200 running at 400mhz and dual (as opposed to single on 3DS) Nintendo/ARM 11 processors running at least 1Ghz (highest ARM11 is ever clocked at) or some throw away chips made from shady factories in china.

i can dig it, i think your spot on about the prices for the most part, Ill still stick with it being 400-450, but i think your dead on about the controller



Around the Network

It's a long road of argues before the launch of the console...i quit that. XD



Spiders den are not for men.

My gaming channel: Stefano and the Spiders.

http://www.youtube.com/user/MultiSpider87?feature=mhum

£299 top for me. I need 2 controls thought!



Switch!!!

Mr Khan said:
amp316 said:
So does that mean that we'll get a Deadly Creatures sequel?

Day one. And if it doesn't sell, nothing else could be hardcore enough to sell, and the console shall be officially barren.

Oh well...  maybe they'll give the Wii U a wrestling game or something.



Proud member of the SONIC SUPPORT SQUAD

Tag "Sorry man. Someone pissed in my Wheaties."

"There are like ten games a year that sell over a million units."  High Voltage CEO -  Eric Nofsinger

RolStoppable said:

Nintendo has not much credibility in the eyes of developers in the first place and the Wii U won't change that. Just look around and notice how some third party developers are already preparing excuses to not develop for Nintendo's next home console.


All you can read von third parties developers is how they praise the Wii U (e.g. Crytek, THQ).



Around the Network

On the topic of third party publishers supporting the Wii U ...

Personally, I expect publishers to take their risk minimization strategy to the next level in the next generation, and games will be developed to target an unprecedented number of platforms representing an unparalleled variety in capabilities. In concrete terms, for the first several years of the next generation I would expect most games to support the PC, current generation HD consoles, all released next generation consoles, and possibly even some smart-phones, tablets and hand-held systems.

Only when the install base of a platform became so small, or the customization costs were so high, that expected game sales could not recover the platform specific development costs would I expect a platform to be ignored; and for most games I would think that expected game sales on the Wii U version would have to be lower than 200,000 to 250,000 to justify ignoring it as a platform.



RolStoppable said:

@Rol, I think that both you and padib are (ironically) both right.  Here's an example of where there's some exception to what you say:

Nintendo cannot reclaim its rightful image in the industry, but that shouldn't bother them. It's the market that counts, not developers. If an entertainer wins the hearts of the audience, but his colleagues talk crap about him, should they care? My point is that the opinions of the people who pay the bills are much more important.

The more accurate analogy is to say that Nintendo won the hearts of many of the audience; the ones who casually show up to the theater and will fill the majority of the empty seats on any given night.  However, they didn't necessarily win the hearts of the people who are the dedicated theater goers that frequent the venue and spend the most time and money there.  There are many PS360 owners who don't own a Wii simply because of the lacking 3rd party support and tech (not talking about the irrelevant haters here).

Your argument centers around the importance of third party support, but the DS and Wii succeeded despite lackluster third party software.

Agreed.  However, it's no secret that Nintendo is still envious of the HD twins being the base for the new COD, GTA, Assassin's Creed, Bioshock, Mass Effect, Resident Evil, Street Fighter, Batman, Red Dead, Elder Scrolls, Battlefield, Portal, etc, etc.  Yes, Nintendo proved emphatically successful (and profitable) without these titles, but what if they could have both?  They'd be unstoppable.  Remember that Nintendo is no stranger to great 3rd party support (NES, SNES).  The SNES version of Street Fighter 2 (easily the biggest 3rd party game at the time) was immensely popular compared to the severely lacking Genesis version.

Also, appeasing third parties inevitably raises the cost of the hardware and Nintendo's market doesn't ask for this sort of upgrade. They are not going to pay for something they didn't want in the first place (which is why the 3DS has to be sold at a loss now as stereoscopic 3D has little to no value). So there's a conflict between what third party developers want and what Nintendo's market wants which brings me back to the point I made in the opening paragraph of this post. Who should be higher on Nintendo's priority list? Does the world really need another HD twin; because ports is all the Wii U can hope for.

The Wii was the perfect system at the perfect time for Nintendo.  Normally you're right that appeasing 3rd parties can come at the expense of the mass market, but it doesn't have to, as proven with the PS2.  Hopefully, Nintendo can now deliver an affordable system (for the mass market) that can also deliver on what the majority of developers want (3rd parties).  The determining factor is Nintendo making those key 1st party games that move systems.  As you said before, the Gamecube didn't deliver on this.  It had bad launch timing in relation to its competition, offered no new hook, and came after a modest selling console (N64).  The Wii U has none of these problems going for it.  If they can launch at around $299 with strong, system selling 1st party titles that demonstrate the functionality of the screen controller, even with just ports of 3rd party games I believe they will be very successful.  $299 wasn't too much for the PS2 to fly off shelves, and if the system is strong enough to at least share the same titles as the PS4/Xbox1080, the mass market will still pick it up as the price comes down.

Again, it's all up to Nintendo.  I see the 3DS launch debacle as a much needed eye-opener for what to rectify with Wii U.  I definitely don't believe it'll be another Dreamcast or Gamecube as far as sales.



padib said:
oniyide said:
oni-link said:

g
I think after overpricing the 3DS they maybe willing to take a loss initially to meet sales marks.  Whether that is going to be the case or not NO ONE KNOWS for sure.  I don't even know for sure if they are losing money on the 3DS right now as Iwata's translation during the board meeting was a bit skewed.  All we know is that the 3DS cost ~$100 to manufacture during launch.  Nintendo could have re-negotiated the price or parts and what they sold to retailers since then in order to meet numbers with the price cut.  AGAIN no one knows if this is the case.  All I know is that looking at the individual pieces of the Wii U; it seems like it might be at the very least 2-3x more powerful than the PS3 looking at the CPU and GPU combination. This along with the rumored 1 GB of some RAM (probably MoSys 1-TSRAM) makes the Wii-U a very competent system!!! My only concern is the CPU and GPU and RAM that might be running the tablet could be a throw away but we still do not know how the controller works in conjunction with the main system.

 

Price prediction is $349.99-$399.99  with the controller selling for $89.99-$129.99. It is  dependent if they are gonna have PICA200 running at 400mhz and dual (as opposed to single on 3DS) Nintendo/ARM 11 processors running at least 1Ghz (highest ARM11 is ever clocked at) or some throw away chips made from shady factories in china.

i can dig it, i think your spot on about the prices for the most part, Ill still stick with it being 400-450, but i think your dead on about the controller

Quote-tree trimmed.

Guys, the tablet doesn't have processor/ram or GPU. From what we've gathered it communicates video signals generated by the WiiU to the tablet via bluetooth. All it needs is a bluetooth reciever and a signal converter to transvert the wireless signals to wired video signals.

The WiiU will most likely release at 350$. Reason? It could release at 400$, but I believe that would be the high pricepoint. Given Nintendo learnt their lesson with the 3DS, I think they'll opt for the lower pricepoint this go around.

i did not know that, that is pretty cheap, sounds like the tech SOny uses for their PSP/PS3 connection. 



RolStoppable said:
z101 said:
RolStoppable said:

Nintendo has not much credibility in the eyes of developers in the first place and the Wii U won't change that. Just look around and notice how some third party developers are already preparing excuses to not develop for Nintendo's next home console.

All you can read von third parties developers is how they praise the Wii U (e.g. Crytek, THQ).

Not from DICE or Bethesda. Besides, there were also many positive comments on the Wii after E3 2006, but there weren't many games that actually backed up those words.

There are already more Wii U games from third parties announced (Batman, Aliens, Metro, Ninja Gaiden, Tekken, Darksiders 2, Dirt, Dragon Quest X, etc.) than we ever see for the Wii in lifetime. :)



oniyide said:
padib said:
oniyide said:
oni-link said:

g
I think after overpricing the 3DS they maybe willing to take a loss initially to meet sales marks.  Whether that is going to be the case or not NO ONE KNOWS for sure.  I don't even know for sure if they are losing money on the 3DS right now as Iwata's translation during the board meeting was a bit skewed.  All we know is that the 3DS cost ~$100 to manufacture during launch.  Nintendo could have re-negotiated the price or parts and what they sold to retailers since then in order to meet numbers with the price cut.  AGAIN no one knows if this is the case.  All I know is that looking at the individual pieces of the Wii U; it seems like it might be at the very least 2-3x more powerful than the PS3 looking at the CPU and GPU combination. This along with the rumored 1 GB of some RAM (probably MoSys 1-TSRAM) makes the Wii-U a very competent system!!! My only concern is the CPU and GPU and RAM that might be running the tablet could be a throw away but we still do not know how the controller works in conjunction with the main system.

 

Price prediction is $349.99-$399.99  with the controller selling for $89.99-$129.99. It is  dependent if they are gonna have PICA200 running at 400mhz and dual (as opposed to single on 3DS) Nintendo/ARM 11 processors running at least 1Ghz (highest ARM11 is ever clocked at) or some throw away chips made from shady factories in china.

i can dig it, i think your spot on about the prices for the most part, Ill still stick with it being 400-450, but i think your dead on about the controller

Quote-tree trimmed.

Guys, the tablet doesn't have processor/ram or GPU. From what we've gathered it communicates video signals generated by the WiiU to the tablet via bluetooth. All it needs is a bluetooth reciever and a signal converter to transvert the wireless signals to wired video signals.

The WiiU will most likely release at 350$. Reason? It could release at 400$, but I believe that would be the high pricepoint. Given Nintendo learnt their lesson with the 3DS, I think they'll opt for the lower pricepoint this go around.

i did not know that, that is pretty cheap, sounds like the tech SOny uses for their PSP/PS3 connection. 

You even did not now this well known fact. But of course you must discuss here about Wii U?