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

Forums - Nintendo - Wii U specs are surprising, says Sonic developer, specifically the GPU and memory

prayformojo on 26 August 2012
lilbroex said:
prayformojo said:
teigaga said:
lilbroex said:
walsufnir said:
fine to read, really. though not too hard to accomplish better specs than current gen i hope this will lead to better 3rd-party-support for wiiu so that not only (or mostly) casuals buy the console.


Oh my goodness... This redundant statement. Its either "Haha, Wii U is weak!!!" or "hmm, well it is this date and these are this many years old and this that and the."

This is getting tiresome. No matter what NIntendo does they will find some angle to dismiss it. I bet you when the PS4 and Durango come out, nobody is going to be quoting dates to dismiss their improvments like they are doing to the Wii U.

Its actually really simple, the Wii U is not powerfull enough for most people to get excited for from a graphical standpoint, all of these articles suggesting that its a tad weaker, a tad stronger or excactly the same all point reaffirm this point. Its firmly attached to the the level of visuals be seeing for the last few years. It annoys me that most nintendo fan want to believe that everyone with something to say other then praise is automatically a nintendo hater, they are simply people with valid opinions; The Wii U is not cutting edge tech. Of course time is a consideration because what was cutting edge and impressive in 2008, no longer is in 2012. Thats how technology works.

I'm buying the Wii U at launch but I don't feel any need to pretend or delude myself into thinking thats its a graphical powerhouse that will usher in a new era of animation, lighting, physics, A.I etc. 

Until Nintendo shows Starwars 1313 or a game of the graphical quality running off the system, then we should all just except the fact the Wii U is simply a minor graphical improvement over the current gen consoles, similar to gamecube vs wii.

Iwata said that the gap between Wii-U and the other systems won't be as wide as it was this gen. Nintendo isn't going to make a beast of a console and destroy the other two, but they know they screwed up last time and I don't think they'd do it again. I think at worst, we're looking at a Dreamcast to Xbox difference and that's fine imo. I loved the Dreamcast, and even though it was clearly behind the Xbox, it was much more fun to play (I had all four consoles that gen). I don't remember EVER thinking "man, the Dreamcast looks like crap". As a matter of fact, I didn't even WANT another console. The only reason I bought a PS2 was because the Dreamcast died at it's hand and I HAD to move on.

The Wii-U will be fine.


I still don't get this. How did they screw up? They won this gen. If the Wii completely stopped selling right this instant, the PS3 and 360 would still never catch it in sells. As Reggie said, they had the best specs the two gens before this one and those have been their worst two gens.

The only people I can think of who didn't like the Wii were the kind who only play miliant shooters and medieval/ancient sword fighting games like Uncharted, God of War and Dark Souls. Oh, and the ever classic graphics fanatics, because if it doesn't look photorealistic(which has only been achieved with ames that used actual photos like Mortal Kombat 1-3) then its no good to them.

People who preferred playing anything aside from those categories generally liked the Wii and DS.

I wonder, with all of the people who say the Wii U has bad graphics, do the PS3 and 360 also now have bad graphics since theirs are not as good as the Wii U?

Hey, don't look at ME. I am currently playing Xenoblade for the first time and it's blowing my freakin' MIND. What I meant by the "screwed up" comment was that Iwata clearly wasn't happy with the power of the Wii. His comments more then exemplified this. I think it's obvious he regrets releasing a console THAT underpowered because it really hampered third party support. Games like COD were so incredibly gimped that there was just NO choice for fans of the series to play it on the Wii. Same goes for Madden etc. There were even full trilogies like Mass Effect that didn't make it to the console because it just couldn't be done. I think Iwata realizes this and isn't going to make that same mistake, or "screw up" again. I think the Wii-U will be able to handle the games of next gen. They may not be 1:1 with the other ports, but at least you'll be able to play them this time which is all that matters imo.



Around the Network
curl-6 on 26 August 2012
prayformojo said:

Games like COD were so incredibly gimped that there was just NO choice for fans of the series to play it on the Wii. 

The superior controls were a good enough reason for some.



DakonBlackblade on 26 August 2012
Crono141 said:
SWORDF1SH said:
Crono141 said:

First, you can say as many things as you like.

Second, I agree that if Sony goes the 599 us dollar route again, they are going to be in a world of hurt.  But if they are packing 4k res technology into it (seriously, not just as a bullet point), then the console will have to be prohibitively expensive, or they will have to take a prohibitive loss up front.  The most logical conclusion then, is that PS4 isn't going to be a "quantum leap" over PS3.


I think that it can be a quantum leap above the ps3 by adopting less expensive tech. Graphically it might not be a quantum leap but how you experience might be. Got a feeling its going to be more that just about graphics next gen

That is true, but Sony has always been a one trick pony.  They believe they make premium devices and try to sell them at a premium price point.  Vita and PS3 both fit this mold.  I think they're going to try to steal Nintendo's thunder by having PS3/4 and Vita connectivity just like Nintendo and the UPad.  But lets be honest about first impressions.  The first impression anyone gets from video games is how they look.  So if WiiU and PS4 look about equivalent, then it goes down to the next impression.  The Wii won with the second impression - unique experience.  If Sony copies the Upad successfully then the experiences will be similar or the same.  So the it comes to the 3rd impression: price point.  We don't know the WiiU's exact price point, but we have a ballpart betwee 250 and 350 dollars.  400 is possible, but I don't think it is at all likely.  So if we take the high end for WiiU, that's 350.  Comes with a tablet controller.  To get the same game experience and WiiU offers someone will have to own a Vita, which currently costs 250 dollars, as well as purchase a PS4.  So unless PS4 costs 100 dollars, WiiU wins on the third impression: price.

"But wait" you say, "PS3/Vita connectivity already happens, so all a person would have to buy is a vita to get the same WiiU experience.  That's only 250 Dollars."  You'd be right, which is another reason why I think WiiU will sell for 250.  But even if it doesn't, and we give a 100 dollar advantage to PS3/Vita; WiiU looks better than PS3.  Its at least a half step above, if not a full step.  So it wins on the first impression.  Plus, it has the psychological effect of the "the latest new thing", whereas PS3 is old hat.  WiiU is going to sell like hotcakes based on it being a new thing.  And by the time PS4 comes around, with whatever price point it sells at (I'm thinking 400 min for any kind of "quantum leap"), then we'll have 2 competing consoles with about the same graphics, about the same play experience, and one that is 50 to 150 dollars cheaper.  WiiU wins again.

So i'm pretty much counting Sony out of the next generation.  They squandered all their PS2 goodwill on PS3, which flopped and has been bad PR for them for the most part.  I don't see a way that they can match or beat what WiiU offers without it costing lots more than the WiiU will cost.

I was reading trought the thread and i found this here, this post is just wow, you got it all figured out alread man, you know exactly how the next gem "console war" will happen years before it even starts, youre fantastic. Ever considered a career as a psychic ?

Trying to predict the future much maybe ?

O and the "flop" PS3, as you called it, is the best selling console this year by far, it also happens to be selling faster tham the 360 when you line up the launches since ever and in theory holds the bigest chunk of the conventional gamers market, Wii sold more but mostly cause it sold to a diferent market tham 360 and PS3 did, the HD twins shared the more conventional (many times called hardcore but i dont realy like that term) gamers market, Wii only got a small share of those onboard, wich is why the WiiU is aiming to keep pleasing the casuals but also apeal to this market they couldnt get last generation by making a more powerfull machine capable of getting 3rd parties interested in developing theyre big games for Nintendo as well.

 

I think the sucess of the WiiU depends on how much ppl will decide to comit to this new console even before knowing anythign about the next box and the new playstation. If Nintendo has a good marketing strat and realy delivers an interesting enought product its on the right way to be the top seller console next gem, if it fails to impress ppl will choose to wait and them itll be all about how superior or not the new Microsoft and Sony conseles are.



Farsala on 26 August 2012

Very impressive, so when the Wii U releases all non ports and most ports will look better then any ps3 or 360 game. It will also be a large graphical leap from last gen Wii. Nintendo will appear to have improved and worked on their console more then their competitors. But RAM is not everything, a few other things would help.



teigaga on 26 August 2012
lilbroex said:
prayformojo said:
teigaga said:

Its actually really simple, the Wii U is not powerfull enough for most people to get excited for from a graphical standpoint, all of these articles suggesting that its a tad weaker, a tad stronger or excactly the same all point reaffirm this point. Its firmly attached to the the level of visuals be seeing for the last few years. It annoys me that most nintendo fan want to believe that everyone with something to say other then praise is automatically a nintendo hater, they are simply people with valid opinions; The Wii U is not cutting edge tech. Of course time is a consideration because what was cutting edge and impressive in 2008, no longer is in 2012. Thats how technology works.

I'm buying the Wii U at launch but I don't feel any need to pretend or delude myself into thinking thats its a graphical powerhouse that will usher in a new era of animation, lighting, physics, A.I etc. 

Until Nintendo shows Starwars 1313 or a game of the graphical quality running off the system, then we should all just except the fact the Wii U is simply a minor graphical improvement over the current gen consoles, similar to gamecube vs wii.

Iwata said that the gap between Wii-U and the other systems won't be as wide as it was this gen. Nintendo isn't going to make a beast of a console and destroy the other two, but they know they screwed up last time and I don't think they'd do it again. I think at worst, we're looking at a Dreamcast to Xbox difference and that's fine imo. I loved the Dreamcast, and even though it was clearly behind the Xbox, it was much more fun to play (I had all four consoles that gen). I don't remember EVER thinking "man, the Dreamcast looks like crap". As a matter of fact, I didn't even WANT another console. The only reason I bought a PS2 was because the Dreamcast died at it's hand and I HAD to move on.

The Wii-U will be fine.


I still don't get this. How did they screw up? They won this gen. If the Wii completely stopped selling right this instant, the PS3 and 360 would still never catch it in sells. As Reggie said, they had the best specs the two gens before this one and those have been their worst two gens.

The only people I can think of who didn't like the Wii were the kind who only play miliant shooters and medieval/ancient sword fighting games like Uncharted, God of War and Dark Souls. Oh, and the ever classic graphics fanatics, because if it doesn't look photorealistic(which has only been achieved with ames that used actual photos like Mortal Kombat 1-3) then its no good to them.

People who preferred playing anything aside from those categories generally liked the Wii and DS.

I wonder, with all of the people who say the Wii U has bad graphics, do the PS3 and 360 also now have bad graphics since theirs are not as good as the Wii U?


No one is suggesting they screwed up in a commercial sense but I think wii's library beyond 2009 has been pretty terrible. Detach personal bias and taste, and I simply believe there was not enough diverse high QUALITY titles on the system to cater to various demographics. 

From a crirical perspective the wii has been brilliant for party games and platformers, but I think most people want a more well rounded system and so do Nintendo HQ. Not to say that they're perfect but I think the HD twins have done a better job of satisfying the full range of their audiences over the full length of their lifes. I think this is the main basis of people critcising the Wii as a console. 



Around the Network
lilbroex on 26 August 2012
teigaga said:
lilbroex said:
prayformojo said:
teigaga said:
lilbroex said:
walsufnir said:
fine to read, really. though not too hard to accomplish better specs than current gen i hope this will lead to better 3rd-party-support for wiiu so that not only (or mostly) casuals buy the console.


Oh my goodness... This redundant statement. Its either "Haha, Wii U is weak!!!" or "hmm, well it is this date and these are this many years old and this that and the."

This is getting tiresome. No matter what NIntendo does they will find some angle to dismiss it. I bet you when the PS4 and Durango come out, nobody is going to be quoting dates to dismiss their improvments like they are doing to the Wii U.

Its actually really simple, the Wii U is not powerfull enough for most people to get excited for from a graphical standpoint, all of these articles suggesting that its a tad weaker, a tad stronger or excactly the same all point reaffirm this point. Its firmly attached to the the level of visuals be seeing for the last few years. It annoys me that most nintendo fan want to believe that everyone with something to say other then praise is automatically a nintendo hater, they are simply people with valid opinions; The Wii U is not cutting edge tech. Of course time is a consideration because what was cutting edge and impressive in 2008, no longer is in 2012. Thats how technology works.

I'm buying the Wii U at launch but I don't feel any need to pretend or delude myself into thinking thats its a graphical powerhouse that will usher in a new era of animation, lighting, physics, A.I etc. 

Until Nintendo shows Starwars 1313 or a game of the graphical quality running off the system, then we should all just except the fact the Wii U is simply a minor graphical improvement over the current gen consoles, similar to gamecube vs wii.

Iwata said that the gap between Wii-U and the other systems won't be as wide as it was this gen. Nintendo isn't going to make a beast of a console and destroy the other two, but they know they screwed up last time and I don't think they'd do it again. I think at worst, we're looking at a Dreamcast to Xbox difference and that's fine imo. I loved the Dreamcast, and even though it was clearly behind the Xbox, it was much more fun to play (I had all four consoles that gen). I don't remember EVER thinking "man, the Dreamcast looks like crap". As a matter of fact, I didn't even WANT another console. The only reason I bought a PS2 was because the Dreamcast died at it's hand and I HAD to move on.

The Wii-U will be fine.


I still don't get this. How did they screw up? They won this gen. If the Wii completely stopped selling right this instant, the PS3 and 360 would still never catch it in sells. As Reggie said, they had the best specs the two gens before this one and those have been their worst two gens.

The only people I can think of who didn't like the Wii were the kind who only play miliant shooters and medieval/ancient sword fighting games like Uncharted, God of War and Dark Souls. Oh, and the ever classic graphics fanatics, because if it doesn't look photorealistic(which has only been achieved with ames that used actual photos like Mortal Kombat 1-3) then its no good to them.

People who preferred playing anything aside from those categories generally liked the Wii and DS.

I wonder, with all of the people who say the Wii U has bad graphics, do the PS3 and 360 also now have bad graphics since theirs are not as good as the Wii U?


No one is suggesting they screwed up in a commercial sense but I think wii's library beyond 2009 has been pretty terrible. Detach personal bias and taste, and I simply believe there was not enough diverse high QUALITY titles on the system to cater to various demographics. 

From a crirical perspective the wii has been brilliant for party games and platformers, but I think most people want a more well rounded system and so do Nintendo HQ. Not to say that they're perfect but I think the HD twins have done a better job of satisfying the full range of their audiences over the full length of their lifes. I think this is the main basis of people critcising the Wii as a console. 


I would still disagree. The library had many good high quality titles up until 2011.



teigaga on 26 August 2012
lilbroex said:
teigaga said:
lilbroex said:


I still don't get this. How did they screw up? They won this gen. If the Wii completely stopped selling right this instant, the PS3 and 360 would still never catch it in sells. As Reggie said, they had the best specs the two gens before this one and those have been their worst two gens.

The only people I can think of who didn't like the Wii were the kind who only play miliant shooters and medieval/ancient sword fighting games like Uncharted, God of War and Dark Souls. Oh, and the ever classic graphics fanatics, because if it doesn't look photorealistic(which has only been achieved with ames that used actual photos like Mortal Kombat 1-3) then its no good to them.

People who preferred playing anything aside from those categories generally liked the Wii and DS.

I wonder, with all of the people who say the Wii U has bad graphics, do the PS3 and 360 also now have bad graphics since theirs are not as good as the Wii U?


No one is suggesting they screwed up in a commercial sense but I think wii's library beyond 2009 has been pretty terrible. Detach personal bias and taste, and I simply believe there was not enough diverse high QUALITY titles on the system to cater to various demographics. 

From a crirical perspective the wii has been brilliant for party games and platformers, but I think most people want a more well rounded system and so do Nintendo HQ. Not to say that they're perfect but I think the HD twins have done a better job of satisfying the full range of their audiences over the full length of their lifes. I think this is the main basis of people critcising the Wii as a console. 


I would still disagree. The library had many good high quality titles up until 2011.

But how frequent were they and across how many genres? 



curl-6 on 26 August 2012
teigaga said:
lilbroex said:
teigaga said:


No one is suggesting they screwed up in a commercial sense but I think wii's library beyond 2009 has been pretty terrible. Detach personal bias and taste, and I simply believe there was not enough diverse high QUALITY titles on the system to cater to various demographics. 

From a crirical perspective the wii has been brilliant for party games and platformers, but I think most people want a more well rounded system and so do Nintendo HQ. Not to say that they're perfect but I think the HD twins have done a better job of satisfying the full range of their audiences over the full length of their lifes. I think this is the main basis of people critcising the Wii as a console. 


I would still disagree. The library had many good high quality titles up until 2011.

But how frequent were they and across how many genres? 

2010 was packed with great Wii games across many genres: Mario Galaxy 2, (3D platformer) Donkey Kong Country Returns/Kirby's Epic Yarn, (2D platformer) Sin & Punishment, (Shmup) Monster Hunter, (RPG) Tatsunoko vs Capcom, (Fighter) Goldeneye 007, (FPS) Red Steel 2, (1st person action) No More Heroes 2...(third peson action)



teigaga on 26 August 2012
curl-6 said:
teigaga said:
lilbroex said:


I would still disagree. The library had many good high quality titles up until 2011.

But how frequent were they and across how many genres? 

2010 was packed with great Wii games across many genres: Mario Galaxy 2, (3D platformer) Donkey Kong Country Returns/Kirby's Epic Yarn, (2D platformer) Sin & Punishment, (Shmup) Monster Hunter, (RPG) Tatsunoko vs Capcom, (Fighter) Goldeneye 007, (FPS) Red Steel 2, (1st person action) No More Heroes 2...(third peson action)

Its still something the Wii U needs to improve upon, even within genres there must be diversity and choice. I like 3rd person action but I didn't like the combat of No heroes, so there should be other choices throughout the year. Unless you have a classic like mario galaxy of course! But still think this is the big reason wii was percieved negatively, 

PS3 in 2010:

action/adventure games: Beyoneta, God of war 3, Darsiders, Castlevania lord of shadows, Assasins creed, Enslaved

action/ 3rdperson shooter: LA Noir, red dead redemption, Just cause 2, Mafia 2 

RPGs: FFXIII, fallout, Mass effect 2, Bioshock 2, Dragon age, White Knight Chronicles, Resonance of fate.

The HD consoles were weak when it came full budget paltformers, this is where the wii was strongest.

wii: super mario galaxy 2, sonic colours, DKC, Epic Mickey , Kirby

PS3: Little big planet..... 



Baron on 26 August 2012

DakonBlackblade said:

I was reading trought the thread and i found this here, this post is just wow, you got it all figured out alread man, you know exactly how the next gem "console war" will happen years before it even starts, youre fantastic. Ever considered a career as a psychic ?

Trying to predict the future much maybe ?

O and the "flop" PS3, as you called it, is the best selling console this year by far, it also happens to be selling faster tham the 360 when you line up the launches since ever and in theory holds the bigest chunk of the conventional gamers market, Wii sold more but mostly cause it sold to a diferent market tham 360 and PS3 did, the HD twins shared the more conventional (many times called hardcore but i dont realy like that term) gamers market, Wii only got a small share of those onboard, wich is why the WiiU is aiming to keep pleasing the casuals but also apeal to this market they couldnt get last generation by making a more powerfull machine capable of getting 3rd parties interested in developing theyre big games for Nintendo as well.

 

I think the sucess of the WiiU depends on how much ppl will decide to comit to this new console even before knowing anythign about the next box and the new playstation. If Nintendo has a good marketing strat and realy delivers an interesting enought product its on the right way to be the top seller console next gem, if it fails to impress ppl will choose to wait and them itll be all about how superior or not the new Microsoft and Sony conseles are.

The PS3 selling the most this year still doesn't change the fact that it's been a flop for Sony. Not only have they lost a significant part of their market share but they've been making a loss ever since the PS3 was launched. If something makes less money than what has been spent on it then it's a flop.

I also don't see how the PS3 holds the biggest chunk of the conventional gamers market. The main reason the PS3 has been catching up to the 360 is because the 360 just doesn't and will never sell in Japan. That's about a 7 million advantage for Sony right there. But install base is nowhere near a good indication of what kind of gamers own a specific console. I could say the 360 has more conventional gamers based on the fact it has a much higher number of games sold per console and more games means real gamers. It's all just baseless assumptions really.

So if you're gonna criticize someones predictions at least make sure you use facts yourself. And leave personal feelings as they are, don't mistake those for facts either.