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

Forums - Nintendo - Iwata Is Aware That People Believe That WiiU Is Underpowered And Says This Is A Misunderstanding

theARTIST0017 on 29 April 2013
AnthonyW86 said:
g911turbo said:
ethomaz said:

It is a good job compared to PS360 but underpowered compared to PS4/Nextbox.


I think the Wii U will produce some great visuals.  There is a law of diminishing returns in effect here, so while there is no doubt that the PS4 is more powerful than the Wii U (even without knowing exactly what's under the Wii U hood), is is slightly subjective as to what is underpowered or not.

For example, I have a Porsche 911.  You have a Nissan Altima.  Is the Altima underpowered or is the Porsche over powered?  If money is no object, the choice is clear, but of course at the end of the day money matters.  MANY would argue the Porsche is a waste of money / power etc.  

Nintendo made a "risky" move for a second time in a row with an alternative take on a controller.  Will it pay off again?  Only time will tell.  But the porting games from the PS4 to Wii U should be even easier than it was porting from the PS3 to the Wii.  Developers are not doing so because they don't see the return on investment being there (yet, if ever), not because the system is "underpowered". 

Yes there is and PS4 doesn't pass the point where it takes into effect. When it comes to power consumption it is exactly at the right spot power/performance wise, atleast in the graphics department. The same goes for price/performance. Let's say the cpu/gpu of the PS4 is 4 times as expensive to produce but it's 6 times as fast. Then the returns are greater than the investment.

power hungry mongers will always use this type of argument to justify whether or not something as powerful as the PS4 is right, but never take into consideration anything other than that. For all we know, Wii U could be only slightly less powerful than the PS4 (not accounting for the ammount of RAM). I mean, its not as if we've seen true Wii U games yet. All we've seen are ports, really rushed games, and a few Nintendo stylized games. But if you look at a game like X for the Wii U, we can start to see that the difference in hardware specs may not make a huge difference in graphical capabilities this gen between those two consoles.



NINTENDO

nintendo forever . . .

Around the Network
ethomaz on 29 April 2013
twilight_link said:

3rd party support from major publishers is not important for Nintendo to became successful, and never was, those who scream are not Nintendo fans they are at best those who left Nintendo generations ago and today they scream, NES was not successful because 3rd party supported them, neither was SNES neither was Game Boy nor Wii or DS.

Today 3DS is successful and 3rd party support is not behind the success and regardless of how powerful WiiU actually is, only success of 1st and 2nd party output decide if it becomes a success or not.

The truth is 3rd party support is highly dangerous for them.

I disagree.. the NES and SNES have a huge third-party support... the games that makes me buy SNES was in the most part third-party games like Internation Super Star Soccer (maybe the most fun soccer game of all the time), Stree Fighter, Top Gear, Final Fantasy, Secret of Mana, Chrono Trigger, Ghost n Globling, Megaman, etc.

I'm glad I have all the Mario games too.. and Zelda, StarFox and the best Metroid ever created (with the best song too).

But they had a stronge third-party support.

And 3DS have a great third-party support too... so I don't get your point.



Lyrikalstylez on 29 April 2013

Nintendo really dug themselves in a ditch that they can't possibly get out this time! I'm not trying to troll but Nintendo needs to just go third party, their games will always sell millions regardless



twilight_link on 29 April 2013
ethomaz said:
twilight_link said:

3rd party support from major publishers is not important for Nintendo to became successful, and never was, those who scream are not Nintendo fans they are at best those who left Nintendo generations ago and today they scream, NES was not successful because 3rd party supported them, neither was SNES neither was Game Boy nor Wii or DS.

Today 3DS is successful and 3rd party support is not behind the success and regardless of how powerful WiiU actually is, only success of 1st and 2nd party output decide if it becomes a success or not.

The truth is 3rd party support is highly dangerous for them.

I disagree.. the NES and SNES have a huge third-party support... the games that makes me buy SNES was in the most part third-party games like Internation Super Star Soccer (maybe the most fun soccer game of all the time), Stree Fighter, Top Gear, Final Fantasy, Secret of Mana, Chrono Trigger, Ghost n Globling, Megaman, etc.

I'm glad I have all the Mario games too.. and Zelda, StarFox and the best Metroid ever created (with the best song too).

But they had a stronge third-party support.

And 3DS have a great third-party support too... so I don't get your point.

there certainly was 3rd party support but the 3rd party support was NOT key factor for their success, perhaps with exception of SQUARE, Enix in their homeland.

On the other hand success of Sony and Microsoft depends entirely on 3rd party support



S.T.A.G.E. on 29 April 2013
oniyide said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


I would say both really to which console and to graphics or gameplay, Nintendo don't push those either. They leave the rudimentary feeling while changing the way you game. Just because I say rudimentary it doesnt mean that no difficulty is involved but there is. The rudimentary par comes from the fact of who Nintendo are making these games for. Nintendo never changes their inward mentality so I can most definitely say both. They dont push graphics even on a console that has great graphics potential. The most impressive and expansive worlds ever created was in Super Mario and Zelda and it still hasnt changed for Nintendo. Those games never pushed graphics, but they were so amazing no one gave a crap. Art style pushes so many love buttons in so many peoples memory because they can take you away from the technical aspects of the game and I think thats great. Nintendo puts you in a world where graphics dont matter and thats just the way I remember them today which is no different than yesteryear when they were my primary console provider. They dont need elaborate stories. Nintendos greatest asset is their creativity and art direction when it comes to their characters. Nintendos games have the building blocks to create gamers out of young children and novice gamers. Microsoft and Sony do no posess the key to this just yet. Sonys creative asset is narrative, cinematics, dialog and character development games with moderate level gameplay as the lowest learning curve. They essentially want you ride the movies because thats what the Playstation has turned into Universal Studios in a box whilst Nintendo is disney in a box. The Xbox 360 doesnt focus so much on the creative but general online and we can be thankful for them because if they werent around we would be scraping around. Microsofts innovation does not come from its games because thats actually their weak point, they got gamers to forget about games for ten seconds and realize that OS matters in games. 

In conclusion every has their strengths and weaknesses and I like a little bit of everything.

Dont really agree too much about the SOny part, they make alot of games that are not cinematic heavy, Modnation, Journey, Flower, LBP, Sly, Tearaway, thats just off of my head. IMHO they are like the jack of all trades, they dont excel in any particular department but do all right in everything. I dont think their is a genre they havent touched at this point. Everything else is spot on.


Sony has been a jack of all trades and when it comes to pumping out great games they've been making a joke out of their competition by themselves. Microsoft made Sony a strong company by taking all of their third party exclusives, so Sony started making their companies produce even more games. More franchises will be formed next gen as well. 

The problem for Sony seems to be with casuals. What no Nintendo fan will agree upon but is a fact within this new millenia Sony started the casual effort first (within the new millenia). They did not go after the media, it was like they didnt care and it sold the way it did because of horrible marketing. If the Playstation Eye motion control had hit in the PS2 era the PS2 would've sold well over 200 million consoles. The Wii hit the jackpot the gen after going after motion controls as well. Nintendo hit people where they lived and gave them an affordable product. What Sony did was they put out the PSeye with a fleet of games and neglectfully expected people to just gravitate to it. 

Sony has the stigma now of being the techie and hardcore gamer console with the inability to make non-gamers game. This doesnt both me any because I love a company that gives a damn about games enough to produce good quantities of them with a level of quality and art style that appeals to me. Microsoft doesnt even try and Nintendo I mostly grew out of. I was a Microsoft fanatic until the Playstation came out and it opened me up to a wealth of games and genres I never thought I would have ever played.

The reason why Sony has always sold well regardless of being in third place is because they are the jack of all trades. They are the all around platform that has the most games and still excells in media without putting it ahead of games.

I know all of this, but the problem Sony has despite their trials is appealing to casuals who dont game.



Around the Network
g911turbo on 29 April 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
oniyide said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


I would say both really to which console and to graphics or gameplay, Nintendo don't push those either. They leave the rudimentary feeling while changing the way you game. Just because I say rudimentary it doesnt mean that no difficulty is involved but there is. The rudimentary par comes from the fact of who Nintendo are making these games for. Nintendo never changes their inward mentality so I can most definitely say both. They dont push graphics even on a console that has great graphics potential. The most impressive and expansive worlds ever created was in Super Mario and Zelda and it still hasnt changed for Nintendo. Those games never pushed graphics, but they were so amazing no one gave a crap. Art style pushes so many love buttons in so many peoples memory because they can take you away from the technical aspects of the game and I think thats great. Nintendo puts you in a world where graphics dont matter and thats just the way I remember them today which is no different than yesteryear when they were my primary console provider. They dont need elaborate stories. Nintendos greatest asset is their creativity and art direction when it comes to their characters. Nintendos games have the building blocks to create gamers out of young children and novice gamers. Microsoft and Sony do no posess the key to this just yet. Sonys creative asset is narrative, cinematics, dialog and character development games with moderate level gameplay as the lowest learning curve. They essentially want you ride the movies because thats what the Playstation has turned into Universal Studios in a box whilst Nintendo is disney in a box. The Xbox 360 doesnt focus so much on the creative but general online and we can be thankful for them because if they werent around we would be scraping around. Microsofts innovation does not come from its games because thats actually their weak point, they got gamers to forget about games for ten seconds and realize that OS matters in games. 

In conclusion every has their strengths and weaknesses and I like a little bit of everything.

Dont really agree too much about the SOny part, they make alot of games that are not cinematic heavy, Modnation, Journey, Flower, LBP, Sly, Tearaway, thats just off of my head. IMHO they are like the jack of all trades, they dont excel in any particular department but do all right in everything. I dont think their is a genre they havent touched at this point. Everything else is spot on.


Sony has been a jack of all trades and when it comes to pumping out great games they've been making a joke out of their competition by themselves. Microsoft made Sony a strong company by taking all of their third party exclusives, so Sony started making their companies produce even more games. More franchises will be formed next gen as well. 

The problem for Sony seems to be with casuals. What no Nintendo fan will agree upon but is a fact within this new millenia Sony started the casual effort first (within the new millenia). They did not go after the media, it was like they didnt care and it sold the way it did because of horrible marketing. If the Playstation Eye motion control had hit in the PS2 era the PS2 would've sold well over 200 million consoles. The Wii hit the jackpot the gen after going after motion controls as well. Nintendo hit people where they lived and gave them an affordable product. What Sony did was they put out the PSeye with a fleet of games and neglectfully expected people to just gravitate to it. 

Sony has the stigma now of being the techie and hardcore gamer console with the inability to make non-gamers game. This doesnt both me any because I love a company that gives a damn about games enough to produce good quantities of them with a level of quality and art style that appeals to me. Microsoft doesnt even try and Nintendo I mostly grew out of. I was a Microsoft fanatic until the Playstation came out and it opened me up to a wealth of games and genres I never thought I would have ever played.

The reason why Sony has always sold well regardless of being in third place is because they are the jack of all trades. They are the all around platform that has the most games and still excells in media without putting it ahead of games.

I know all of this, but the problem Sony has despite their trials is appealing to casuals who dont game.

"making a joke out of their competition" is exactly what I mean when I say taking discreet jabs and then expecting people not to react... anyhow, talk about not giving credit where credit is due.  Releasing an ADD ON vs. moving forward with motion control as your primary controller.  Yeah well, the NES had the "Power Glove".  And just because you say "within the new millenia" doesn't make it OK.  Stop cherry picking.

Also, Microsoft and Nintendo have success because of the they things they do right too, not just because Sony did something wrong.  By that logic, I could argue that the only reason Sony exists in the gaming market is because Nintendo SCREWED UP and didnt want their CD medium.  But we all know that's BS and there is a lot more too it... Sony has done a lot of things right, as have the other two. 

"If the Playstation Eye motion control had hit in the PS2 era the PS2 would've sold well over 200 million consoles."  Talk about pulling numbers out of thin air!



Kaizar on 29 April 2013
ethomaz said:
g911turbo said:
ethomaz said:

It is a good job compared to PS360 but underpowered compared to PS4/Nextbox.


I think the Wii U will produce some great visuals.  There is a law of diminishing returns in effect here, so while there is no doubt that the PS4 is more powerful than the Wii U (even without knowing exactly what's under the Wii U hood), it is slightly subjective as to what is underpowered or not.

For example, I have a Porsche 911.  You have a Nissan Altima.  Is the Altima underpowered or is the Porsche over powered?  If money is no object, the choice is clear, but of course at the end of the day money matters.  MANY would argue the Porsche is a waste of money / power etc.

Nintendo made a "risky" move for a second time in a row with an alternative take on a controller.  Will it pay off again?  Only time will tell.  But the porting of games from the PS4 to Wii U should be even easier than it was porting from the PS3 to the Wii.  Porting from PS3 to Wii U should be easy relatively speaking...  Developers are not doing so because they don't see the return on investment being there (yet, if ever), not because the system is "underpowered".

Wii U is more difficult to developer than Wii... that was what I "hear" from developers and this time the Wii U is not that cheaper like Wii and the mostly important it lacks "WOW factor".

In fact the Wii U launch is more similar with GameCube than Wii... Wii was phenomenal even bigger than PS2 in the first years (just fist years).


The Wii U is as easy to develop for as the 360, despite the greater specs across the board.



Kaizar on 29 April 2013
Lyrikalstylez said:
Nintendo really dug themselves in a ditch that they can't possibly get out this time! I'm not trying to troll but Nintendo needs to just go third party, their games will always sell millions regardless


The Nintendo 3DS is becoming more better then the PS2, so what are you talking about.

The Wii U did other better then PS3 & 360 but less better then Wii.



Kaizar on 29 April 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Kaizar said:
oniyide said:
curl-6 said:
oniyide said:
Leadified said:
oniyide said:
Leadified said:

I dont think they have that kind of system to be honest with you. They are trying to do the WIi thing all over again. Dont do an actual generational leap, and just give the people something funky, like the wiimote before. Problem is no one cares about the pad right now, SO they dont have that and they were kinda banking on it.

The Wii U has more than enough to show off it's a step up from the PS3 and Xbox 360. If Nintendo will acutally show that off is another story.

Just like they had with the Wii? Some how i doubt that, but hell the system did come out, maybe in about five years we will see games looking a step up from PS360, considering how Wii turned out, im remaining skeptical.

The Wii did end up producing games the 6th gen systems couldn't.


No it didnt, any game on Wii could have been done on at least a Xbox, it would just be downgraded, and it took till just now to get that. There are PS360 games that CANT be dont on Wii right now. Unless its downgraded to the point where its not even the same game anymore. (Dead Rising, SW Force Unleashed, POP,etc.)


No, both GameCube & Xbox were pratically completely on par with each other on what they both could do, except the GameCube had the added ability of doing 60 fps, while the Xbox & PS2 are 30 fps.


XBox and PS2 had DVD's that held more content than the Gamecube. When CD piracy jumped up and the Dreamcast phased out, that wasnt an incentive to jump in Nintendos direction. DVD format had taken over not only film but also gaming for the generation, making the PS2 the must have console to own for both gamers and movie enthusiasts and putting the Xbox in a distant second place. Japan didnt help the Xboxes cause either, but then again why should they when the PS2 provides all that they want?


I think it was really mostly the 3rd Party support that made us buy the PS2.

Anyways I was just saying that the Xbox wasn't more powerful then GameCube but really more like on par.

Anyways, the 3DS is looking to have a great Library like the PS2 did but with the ability to purchase 3D movies both physically & digitally, pick your poisen LOL. Plus Hulu Plus is getting a 3D streaming library of movies, and Netflix will eventually join Vudu & Hulu & Blockbuster in having 3D streaming, and people can take 3D photos & 3D videos and do 3D Augmented Reality & so fort.

The Wii U is the only Home Console with true Panarama view and the first video game system to do "Single-Player-Asymetrical-Gaming" and is the only video game system to do NFC and have a geomagnetic sensor and a built in microphone into the controller for a home console controller, and have the capability to do video chat while gaming online multiplayer.

You can already purchase Panarama view videos on the Wii U in North America & Europe. And they dramatically improved the loading time with the current firmware 3.0.0. And they are doing another dramatic system improvement this summer with another major firmware update during the time that a lot of their major Wii U games get release.



S.T.A.G.E. on 29 April 2013
Kaizar said:
Lyrikalstylez said:
Nintendo really dug themselves in a ditch that they can't possibly get out this time! I'm not trying to troll but Nintendo needs to just go third party, their games will always sell millions regardless


The Nintendo 3DS is becoming more better then the PS2, so what are you talking about.

The Wii U did ore better then PS3 & 360 but less better then Wii.


The 3DS is a portable the PS2 is an actual full scale console. There will probably never be another console that is that dominant again.