First Wii U UK Commercial -- Leads To Horrible Display Of Game Journalism.

[QUOTE="Vickman178"]

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

Yeah, Nintendo clearly skipped the class DOINGSOMETHINGASGOODORBETTER101.

It's no longer an incident, but a trend -- buying Nintendo hardware will lead to an inferior experience in some capacity when compared to one of their competitors. And the real bltch of it is, the areas of inferiority are nearly a decade old. I mean, fvck, all they had to do was go buy an Xbox and a PS3 and reverse engineer the technology. It's the same thing with the Classic controller having to be plugged into the stupid fvcking fairy wand or whatever it was called all the time -- it's not a difference in design, it's just plain stupid.

Sorry, but I'm just really frustrated with Nintendo. It seems like they are too focused on being cute and clever these days, placing an emphasis on shlt no one wanted or asked for, while delivering stale experiences in other important areas.

Haziqonfire

LOL! I honestly can't believe what I just read. Oh my gosh... I can't even hate on you this is just pure gold of a comment right here. Man I honestly feel like after comments like these that the world shuld just end in 2012 lol..HEHE BWHAHAHAA!!!

The other thing that Shame-usBlackley mentioned was that with the Wii U you'll be getting an inferior experience ... well, in that case you might as well not buy consoles period as they're generally going to be outperformed by a high end PC.

People buy consoles for games and the experience. I want a Wii U because of Nintendo titles and a few third party titles. The fact that it's not simply just a console trying to be a PC is also a bonus, because if I wanted that I'd just ... get a PC.

An inferior experience compared to other consoles. I clearly qualified that in my post. Power is the only real expectation one can expect from a high end PC. With the Wii U, it can't even muster up a comparable experience to 8 year old existing console hardware. There's a (huge) difference between distinction and diminished expectations.

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

Seems like the haters lack imagination, or never played a DS or 3DS and can't see the possibilities. How can some of you guys be so against the tablet controller without ever having tried it yet?

Personally I find these kinds of innovations much more exciting than just having better graphics. Physics and AI are another story, but there's not that many examples of those things actually making enough difference to stand out and mean anything special so far in consoles.

dvader654

Motion Controls were also touted by Nintendo and nintendo fans as innovation. I heard the same argument 6 years ago, that it is the us who lack imagintion while Nintendo has some Steve Jobs like innovators who would revolutionize the industry with motion controls.

Six years and hundreds of shovelware later, Nintendo itself has moved on from the failed experiment that was motion controls and six years from now, they will look back at this ridiculous tablet and realize that game designers never wanted a tablet or a f*cking wand.

That's one thing Nintendo fans dont realize... it's not about the hardware, it's about the game designers who make games. These guys have said time and again that they want to make traditional games instead of focusing on gimmicks.

Zinger!

I said Move works for shooters. That's it. And Sony didnt shove it down our throats either.

I don't know where you get your information from, but Nintendo is still using Wii remote motion controllers next gen with Wii U. Sales prove that people are interested in things, to that sales don't matter is falling in to the "hardcore" gamers entitlement and relevance fallacy.

Look at how popular tablets and smart phone gaming has become. Why not blend traditional controls with touch screen tablets to try something new? If you don't like what they're doing, don't buy one, but I don't see the point in hating on the company or its fans.

Bigboi500

Once again, you seem to equate popularity with quality. Have you played a racing game on a tablet or your smartphone? Have you played mass effect? have you played a platformer? Because I have. Mass Effect is a pain in the ass to control. Even when it works, the control is limited. Racing games with their gyro driving suck too. It's all arcadey, souless and archaic. The way Sony has implemented touch functionality with the Vita is something I can get behind because it's a handheld and you are always looking at the screen on this handheld.

With this tablet, Nintendo is asking you to look up and down everytime you want to change a weapon, look at the menu or whatever "innovation" they will come up with. It simply wont work unless you always plan to game on this tablet. Again, i would be okay with it if they didnt half ass it. Your argument seems to be that we should give Nintendo a pass because they are doing something new. But when they give us this SD tablet from the 80s with no multitouch support, what the hell are we supposed to say? Cant i not criticize a gaming company for releasing a console in 2012 with hardware from 2005?

You are right. If I dont like what I see, I shouldn't buy it. But as one of the three big players in this industry who will shape the next 6-7 years of this industry, it's not as simple as boycotting their antique product. We saw that this gen with Sony and MS copying motion controls and this gen going to sh*t soon after. So it does matter. And if you want to go back to the last 6 years with the same shovelware you seem content with, then that's fine, but I wont.

Lastly, this tablet IS the controller for the Wii U. They have marketed it this way, the revealed it as the new thing. Sure the motion controllers are compatible, but they are NOT the default controller. What makes you think that developers that were NOT making games for the Wii while it was the default controller will now start making games for it when it's NOT the default controller?

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

I don't know where you get your information from, but Nintendo is still using Wii remote motion controllers next gen with Wii U. Sales prove that people are interested in things, to that sales don't matter is falling in to the "hardcore" gamers entitlement and relevance fallacy.

Look at how popular tablets and smart phone gaming has become. Why not blend traditional controls with touch screen tablets to try something new? If you don't like what they're doing, don't buy one, but I don't see the point in hating on the company or its fans.

S0lidSnake

Once again, you seem to equate popularity with quality. Have you played a racing game on a tablet or your smartphone? Have you played mass effect? have you played a platformer? Because I have. Mass Effect is a pain in the ass to control. Even when it works, the control is limited. Racing games with their gyro driving suck too. It's all arcadey, souless and archaic. The way Sony has implemented touch functionality with the Vita is something I can get behind because it's a handheld and you are always looking at the screen on this handheld.

With this tablet, Nintendo is asking you to look up and down everytime you want to change a weapon, look at the menu or whatever "innovation" they will come up with. It simply wont work unless you always plan to game on this tablet. Again, i would be okay with it if they didnt half ass it. Your argument seems to be that we should give Nintendo a pass because they are doing something new. But when they give us this SD tablet from the 80s with no multitouch support, what the hell are we supposed to say? Cant i not criticize a gaming company for releasing a console in 2012 with hardware from 2005?

You are right. If I dont like what I see, I shouldn't buy it. But as one of the three big players in this industry who will shape the next 6-7 years of this industry, it's not as simple as boycotting their antique product. We saw that this gen with Sony and MS copying motion controls and this gen going to sh*t soon after. So it does matter. And if you want to go back to the last 6 years with the same shovelware you seem content with, then that's fine, but I wont.

Lastly, this tablet IS the controller for the Wii U. They have marketed it this way, the revealed it as the new thing. Sure the motion controllers are compatible, but they are NOT the default controller. What makes you think that developers that were NOT making games for the Wii while it was the default controller will now start making games for it when it's NOT the default controller?

Nintendo (and as a result, the types of core gamers it draws) has gotten increasingly conservative in terms of core game design (the minority of core gamers who had interests beyond Mario/Zelda/Metroid had to beg Nintendo on their knees for Xenoblade to be released outside Japan and the published sales figures are very modest to put it kindly).

Given the franchise fixation of Nintendo's core, risk for Nintendo entails not releasing a Mario game every week. Whether or not one needs to go through a gimmick interface to play the games is immaterial.

Also, looking at two screens on the DS/3DS works for the same reason that looking at PiP or an onscreen HuD works. Having to look away from a screen into one's hands is a different matter entirely (one of the challenges of Zombi U is that everything is real time so when one is looking at one's inventory screen one isn't looking out for the zombies which might be creeping up on you on the main screen).

Releasing original games is dangerous even in the wider industry because even outside of Nintendo, many people care about franchises, not developers and many give first preference to the sequel to the favorite game, but every other audience is much more open to new experiences than Nintendo's core audience (I will say that their casuals don't seem to care about franchises even within the context of casual games, which I think is kind of cool), so if you are honestly looking for different experiences as opposed to just conventional experiences with a new controller, you'd be well advised to look elsewhere.CarnageHeart

I think Nintendo is probably the most risky console manufacturer post 2004 -- and Nintendo releases Mario because Mario sells, 2D Mario to be more precise. 3D Mario still suffers. NSMB and NSMB Wii were the best selling Mario games on each platform, thus why you see new versions for both the 3DS and Wii U. It's going to help push units. I like Mario, but I can understand why a lot of people think it's been milked to death.

Two screens isn't really a big problem. I haven't really had issues managing two screens on the 3DS/DS - and I don't really buy the excuse that they're closer together so it's a lot easier. I'm going to be sitting in front of my TV and holding the controller pretty comfortably aligned with the TV. I'll see how it works when I actually get the console, but I'm pretty certain I won't have issues - and I don't think others will either once they start using the GamePad more.

That's not a fair criticism. Every single piece of hardware becomes outdated quickly. It's the nature of technology.

The problem people have with Nintendo's approach to the technological side is that, by not staying current on raw power, they limit what developers can do with their platform. I don't see any issue with anyone wanting Nintendo to get back to producing powerful hardware; better, stronger consoles are what drives games forward. Better tech opens the door to new possibilities, refinement of existing ideas.

Yeah, PCs always get the lead within months of a new console's release. That's just the way of things, though. It's an open platform, thus they aren't limited by architecture. Doesn't mean the console makers shouldn't be striving to improve their respective platforms' power.

Could argue that Microsoft and Sony already are. Xbox has Smart Glass coming down the line (which adds tablet functionality of some sort), and Sony, if you stretch it, with the parity between the Vita and PlayStation 3 libraries. Sony, I think, is on the right track for handling that stuff for the most part (being able to resume a home console game on the go is a real cool concept; not sure if that should be a driving force for a hand-held, however), though Nintendo has the smoothest implementation. Microsoft's... I don't know. Would need to see the full extent of its purpose and its execution in action first.

c_rake

You're right - technology in general does become outdated quickly. However, my point is more so that I wish Microsoft and Sony didn't just focus on power. Power is great, it gives developers a lot to work with. However, if a generation is still going on this late -- multiplat games suffer. The last two years of multiplats on the PS3 and 360 have performance pretty poorly compared to their PC counterparts. I'm sure not everyone is picky with frame rate and performance, but I am and I notice these things quI'd love to see a Nintendo console that's able to be innovative with it's input methods and powerful as well, but that's not really the philosophy that Nintendoite a bit. It's annoying, as I don't have a PC right now to use -- but I'm definitely thinking about investing in one to avoid those problems. My main point is if people are all about power -- the PC is the best option and consoles are definitely not.

I'd love to see a Nintendo console that's able to be innovative with it's input methods and powerful as well, but that's not really the philosophy that Nintendo believes in -- they're against aiding in higher development costs and they're not really able to easily offset their costs with other business ventures like Sony and Microsoft can. Considering that, I think the direction they take is fairly smart -- I look towards Sony and Microsoft more for being the ones that can easily offer a new hook as well as a powerful console than Nintendo at this point.

I actually was shocked when I saw Nintendo TVii, because it actually looks a lot nicer than what Microsoft is doing with SmartGlass. I wonder if Microsoft has since improved it, but from what I saw Nintendo had a nicer UI and interface for that kind of thing, which was surprising to me because ... it's Nintendo. I might sound bias for saying it, but I also know down the line Microsoft will probably have something better and Nintendo will probably never update their interface much until their next console.

I'm actually not a fan of Sony's console on the go type experience with Vita, but there's a large enough market for it - the PSP made sure of that, so it's cool that Sony found it's own market within the handheld space. Cloud saves between both versions actually is a really cool idea - but the problem comes with how the games are sold. Would you really want to buy two versions of (essentially) the same game just so you can use the save across both? They have to find a method of selling both games together at a reasonable price while still being profitable. I'm curious to see how they'll tackle it, as the idea could set a nice trend in the industry for the future -- if done correctly.

An inferior experience compared to other consoles. I clearly qualified that in my post. Power is the only real expectation one can expect from a high end PC. With the Wii U, it can't even muster up a comparable experience to 8 year old existing console hardware. There's a (huge) difference between distinction and diminished expectations.

Shame-usBlackley

Power is definitely not the only expectation that one can expect from the PC -- it's what stems from it that's more important. Better performance and better graphics, better use of technology. On top of that, the secondary aspects like better online, better flexibility, and a much better application for playing and selling games (Steam). As far as I know the Wii U can easily offer experiences to the older platforms - as well as outperform them in some cases.

I've been following the Wii U for a while now and actually read developers comments about the console. [1][2][3] -- developers stating more or less that the console is at minimum as powerful as the 360 and PS3, and a bit more so. There's also an article from EuroGamer that disescts the Wii U's specs and determines where it fits. I haven't seen any developers saying it's weaker. If you have some evidence of the specifications being weaker, I wouldn't mind having a look see.

Power is definitely not the only expectation that one can expect from the PC -- it's what stems from it that's more important. Better performance and better graphics, better use of technology. On top of that, the secondary aspects like better online, better flexibility, and a much better application for playing and selling games (Steam). As far as I know the Wii U can easily offer experiences to the older platforms - as well as outperform them in some cases.

I've been following the Wii U for a while now and actually read developers comments about the console. [1][2][3] -- developers stating more or less that the console is at minimum as powerful as the 360 and PS3, and a bit more so. There's also an article from EuroGamer that disescts the Wii U's specs and determines where it fits. I haven't seen any developers saying it's weaker. If you have some evidence of the specifications being weaker, I wouldn't mind having a look see.

Haziqonfire

You're still looking at it from within a power vacuum. The Wii requires wired headsets and some arcane method of plugging said headset in to a controller the player isn't even using. That's what I'm talking about when I say that when you buy Nintendo consoles, you are getting an inferior experience to those offered currently by the market. It's been like this for three generations now in different areas -- first it was online implementation. Then it was a controller that limited the types of genres a player could enjoy. Now it is something simple and relatively meaningless like voice chat, but it's something that would have been so EASY to nail that it's even more insulting in a way.

You're still looking at it from within a power vacuum. The Wii requires wired headsets and some arcane method of plugging said headset in to a controller the player isn't even using. That's what I'm talking about when I say that when you buy Nintendo consoles, you are getting an inferior experience to those offered currently by the market. It's been like this for three generations now in different areas -- first it was online implementation. Then it was a controller that limited the types of genres a player could enjoy. Now it is something simple and relatively meaningless like voice chat, but it's something that would have been so EASY to nail that it's even more insulting in a way.

Shame-usBlackley

I'd agree about online, as it's always been inferior - but with the 3DS, it's been an improvement. I'd be lying if I said I didn't enjoy playing Mario Kart 7 online, or that I didn't have fun playing Kid Icarus: Uprising online.

The only genre I can think of that was limited by the Wii Remote were fighters, which have a variety of controller types that match the players preference -- arcade sticks, console controllers, specialty traditioanl controllers, etc. Mostly everything else I played on the Wii worked well. On top of that, controller options were given if you didn't like them. I see the point you'e trying to make, I just don't think it makes the experience inferior.

The voice chat thing is up in the air. I know what's been reported but I have no idea what it'll mean. Nintendo has already commented stating that third party licensed headphones are available. Nintendo might have their own wireless headphone option. I don't know. I also think that the news about the voice chat has been blown out of porportion as I honestly don't see the big deal with having the GamePad next to you somewhere while you play. However, I'm also not the best person to judge as I generally don't use the headset on my 360 and I never use voice chat during online games.

Could argue that Microsoft and Sony already are. Xbox has Smart Glass coming down the line (which adds tablet functionality of some sort), and Sony, if you stretch it, with the parity between the Vita and PlayStation 3 libraries. Sony, I think, is on the right track for handling that stuff for the most part (being able to resume a home console game on the go is a real cool concept; not sure if that should be a driving force for a hand-held, however), though Nintendo has the smoothest implementation. Microsoft's... I don't know. Would need to see the full extent of its purpose and its execution in action first.

c_rake

Personally, I think the future of tv console gaming lays in the mobile market. That sounds contradictory, but think about it this way: what if you could play all your games on a single mobile gaming device, and use some sort of blutooth connection to throw the game onto your television (or any television, really), with just the push of a few buttons? The company that could pull off this sort of thing (and let's face it, Sony is the closest to doing so, especially with how deep they are in the tech hardware business) could basically corner the entire mobile and console gaming market, overnight.

Although, personally, I'm still waiting on true VR gaming to come to fruition :P

I think Nintendo is probably the most risky console manufacturer post 2004 -- and Nintendo releases Mario because Mario sells, 2D Mario to be more precise. 3D Mario still suffers. NSMB and NSMB Wii were the best selling Mario games on each platform, thus why you see new versions for both the 3DS and Wii U. It's going to help push units. I like Mario, but I can understand why a lot of people think it's been milked to death.

Haziqonfire

Maybe. But releasing the Wii with a Zelda port and releasing the WiiU along with another side scrolling Mario platforer is hardly risky. They've been playing it very safe with software for a while now, sticking to the tried and true IPs.

[QUOTE="Haziqonfire"]

I think Nintendo is probably the most risky console manufacturer post 2004 -- and Nintendo releases Mario because Mario sells, 2D Mario to be more precise. 3D Mario still suffers. NSMB and NSMB Wii were the best selling Mario games on each platform, thus why you see new versions for both the 3DS and Wii U. It's going to help push units. I like Mario, but I can understand why a lot of people think it's been milked to death.

meetroid8

Maybe. But releasing the Wii with a Zelda port and releasing the WiiU along with another side scrolling Mario platforer is hardly risky. They've been playing it very safe with software for a while now, sticking to the tried and true IPs.

When I was addressing risk, I was talking about it from a hardware perspective, not software. Between the DS, Wii, 3DS and Wii U - only the 3DS has been safe.

It's hilarious that you bring up the sales. Like that's a barometer for innovation. You do know that CoD and Just Dance are two of the best selling franchises this gen. OMG, I am blown away by the innovation in those two games. If I had to guess, Twilight is your favorite movie of all time.S0lidSnake

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]It's hilarious that you bring up the sales. Like that's a barometer for innovation. You do know that CoD and Just Dance are two of the best selling franchises this gen. OMG, I am blown away by the innovation in those two games. If I had to guess, Twilight is your favorite movie of all time.Black_Knight_00

Doesn't the Wii supposedly have the lowest attach rate of the three systems?

[QUOTE="SuperFlakeman"]

I can't decide what's more funny, this article or the fact that people think it's ok to directly convert yen->dollar.

Doesn't work like that guys.

To get the dollar equivalent price from yen you typically divide the yen amount by 100. So, 13400 Yen = $134. The price of the gamepad will most likely be close to this figure.

Grammaton-Cleric

I found a currency converter and entered in the numbers and it spit out the conversion as 169.44 in U.S. dollars so I'm unsure as to where you are getting your information because what they claimed seems accurate.

Your process seems far less reliable, especially since it wouldn't account for fluctuations in currency value, which shift consistently. (The converter I used is up to date on exchange rates)

For example a new PS3 game in Euros is typically 60 euros, whereas the same game in the US costs $60. I.e. the conversion factor is 1, for the typical PS3/360 multiplat.

Calculating it the normal way, we get that $60 translates to 46.01 euros, in other words we Europeans actually pay ~33% more than NA's for games, for no reason. It's an arbitrary markup.

The factor between Japan and NA is usually ~100.

Seems like the haters lack imagination, or never played a DS or 3DS and can't see the possibilities. How can some of you guys be so against the tablet controller without ever having tried it yet?

Personally I find these kinds of innovations much more exciting than just having better graphics. Physics and AI are another story, but there's not that many examples of those things actually making enough difference to stand out and mean anything special so far in consoles.

Bigboi500

Oh my god a reasonable person!

Here's a semi-long video about photorealism in games, and whether or not its a realistic goal:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FRTsl1jCqq8

Basically, the video says that we're still not close to producing actual photorealistic games, and doing so, among other things, would be extremely expensive.

That being said, I believe Nintendo makes games for the masses. HDTVs are just now finally the standard, even though they've been available for many years. And its that mentality that Nintendo seems to have when it comes to their hardware. The time for cheap, HD games is now, and Nintendo is capitalizing on that. And so are the customers that don't or can't get the latest and greatest as soon as its available. Nintendo is also adding the tablet, which for better or worse, is all the rage now.

As per the reasoning of the video, I believe that Nintendo has decided that having the most powerful hardware is too expensive to be profitable. Not just for the cost of the components, but for the development of games, and possible lower number sales due to the mass public not getting the latest and greatest. And for that, I don't fault them.

The issue, for me, isn't the tablet controller per se but rather the realization that said controller is quite literally half the cost of the system.

Nintendo gimped yet another console in some misguided attempt to implement a fad and once again undercut the power of their hardware in doing so. They could have easily dumped that money directly into the guts of the system and delivered a reasonable boost in performance for a modest asking price but, as Black Knight already mentioned, they decided to predicate the Wii U on yet another gimmick.

As it stands, I don't see the need to shell out 350 dollars to play versions of games I already own via a tablet.

Also, the "hater" accusations are as banal as they are unfounded. I've been playing Nintendo games since the NES and I consider some of Nintendos software to be the very best ever made. That understood, Nintendo is now one of my least favorite companies as they have lost the pulse of core enthusiasts such as myself and rather seem more interested in retaining the interest of casual consumers and non-gamers.

That of course is their prerogative but I certainly don't have to continue supporting them given their indifference to my tastes and inclinations.

I would also remind people that many of us "haters" had serious concerns when the Wii was first revealed and that system turned out exactly as I predicted: a third-rate console with a third-rate software library punctuated by the occasional quality title. Nintendo hasn't made a truly great home console since the SNES and based on what I've seen the Wii U isn't going to change that.

Here's a semi-long video about photorealism in games, and whether or not its a realistic goal:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FRTsl1jCqq8

Basically, the video says that we're still not close to producing actual photorealistic games, and doing so, among other things, would be extremely expensive.

That being said, I believe Nintendo makes games for the masses. HDTVs are just now finally the standard, even though they've been available for many years. And its that mentality that Nintendo seems to have when it comes to their hardware. The time for cheap, HD games is now, and Nintendo is capitalizing on that. And so are the customers that don't or can't get the latest and greatest as soon as its available. Nintendo is also adding the tablet, which for better or worse, is all the rage now.

As per the reasoning of the video, I believe that Nintendo has decided that having the most powerful hardware is too expensive to be profitable. Not just for the cost of the components, but for the development of games, and possible lower number sales due to the mass public not getting the latest and greatest. And for that, I don't fault them.

Grieverr

Outside of sports and racing games, no one is going for realism. Most games look like something one would find in a comic book.

However, all art styles benefit from increases in processing power because they better realize the vision of the artists (and allow artists to be more ambitious).

I've been gaming for a very long time and I can remember when title screens were the only chance gamers got to see the characters as envisioned by their creators so I love how close many modern games are to the original visions of their creators.

Of course, more processing power allows not only better graphics, but more stuff onscreen (denser level geometry, more enemies and friends onscreen and bigger worlds).

If you're content with what Nintendo decides to give you, fine and good, but don't minimize the importance of their decisions.

Nintendo hasn't made a truly great home console since the SNES and based on what I've seen the Wii U isn't going to change that.Grammaton-Cleric

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]Nintendo hasn't made a truly great home console since the SNES and based on what I've seen the Wii U isn't going to change that.Black_Knight_00

For third parties, cartridges were expensive and small. For consumers, they were expensive and small (small was less of a concern to us, though it did factor in). Gamewise, not only music and voices but also textures tended to be a lot cleaner on the PS1. I remember reading somewhere that the N64 had a miniscule amount of texture memory, though I reach my conclusions about hardware based on games not on spec sheets.

Gamewise, the choice was between Nintendo's games (and a handful of random third parties) and the rest of the industry's, so how high an opinion one has of Nintendo's games impacts how much one thinks of Nintendo's post-SNES consoles.

I enjoyed Mario 64, Waverace and Turok (my brother had an N64 before the looong dry spells pushed him to trade it in for a PS1) but individually I liked Wipeout XL, Twisted Metal 2, Tekken 3, Carnage Heart, Colony Wars, Gran Turismo, Silent Hill, Valkyria Profile, Front Mission 3, MGS, Xenogears, Suikoden 2, Einhander (back in those days I wondered if there was anything Square couldn't do), Tenchu, Tomb Raider 2, Final Fantasy 7, Silent Hill, Wipeout XL, Vagrant Story, Driver and Tony Hawk better.

I agree that with the N64 Nintendo did a decent job of (and the best it could) more or less singlehandedly covering all the bases. It was a very different company then than it is now in that respect, but from another perspective it was the same in that it did what was best for Nintendo and didn't have much regard for third parties or consumers.

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]Nintendo hasn't made a truly great home console since the SNES and based on what I've seen the Wii U isn't going to change that.CarnageHeart

For third parties, cartridges were expensive and small. For consumers, they were expensive and small (small was less of a concern to us, though it did factor in). Gamewise, not only music and voices but also textures tended to be a lot cleaner on the PS1. I remember reading somewhere that the N64 had a miniscule amount of texture memory, though I reach my conclusions about hardware based on games not on spec sheets.

Gamewise, the choice was between Nintendo's games (and a handful of random third parties) and the rest of the industry's, so how high an opinion one has of Nintendo's games impacts how much one thinks of Nintendo's post-SNES consoles.

I enjoyed Mario 64, Waverace and Turok (my brother had an N64 before the looong dry spells pushed him to trade it in for a PS1) but individually I liked Wipeout XL, Twisted Metal 2, Tekken 3, Carnage Heart, Colony Wars, Gran Turismo, Silent Hill, Valkyria Profile, Front Mission 3, MGS, Xenogears, Suikoden 2, Einhander (back in those days I wondered if there was anything Square couldn't do), Tenchu, Tomb Raider 2, Final Fantasy 7, Silent Hill, Wipeout XL, Vagrant Story, Driver and Tony Hawk better.

I agree that with the N64 Nintendo did a decent job of (and the best it could) more or less singlehandedly covering all the bases. It was a very different company then than it is now in that respect, but from another perspective it was the same in that it did what was best for Nintendo and didn't have much regard for third parties or consumers.

If you're content with what Nintendo decides to give you, fine and good, but don't minimize the importance of their decisions.

CarnageHeart

Technological progress still happens even in Nintendo's case, just slower and steadier.

I prefer it this way since the negative consequences heavily outweigh the gain, i.e. death of the mid-tier dev, michael bay syndrome, no place for risk taking due to mega budgets, etc.)

This video sums up my thoughts on the PS3/360 environment, and the reason why I have to restrict myself to PC and Nintendo platforms: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6d_bq8aFA4

Although admittedly there are a few PS3/360 exclusive gems aswell. Hopefully these will find their way over to PC next gen so that I can simply ignore Sony and MS systems altogether.

I just don't get the excitement for this system at all. Much like its predecessor it's last gen hardware with a new controller. Whooooop dee doo! As much as I LOVE my Metroid and Donkey Kong it's just not even close to being up to par with other systems (that are out currently!) Online play? Friends lists? Watch a DVD? Achievements or trophy's? Go Online? Nope! They don't need to add any real features just another stupid fvcking controller attached to what is basically an xbox 360 power level console so everyone can eat it up. It's hard to be too mad at Nintendo when you realize how fvcking brilliant they are at bamboozling people out of their money. The saddest part is that very few people really see what is going on, it doesn't matter what they fvcking do because you'll buy it anyway because yaaaay more mario but it's on a tablet this time!GodModeEnabled

I buy gaming systems for video games, so yes I care more about the actual games like Mario, Zelda, etc. more than some pointless features that don't add much to my gaming experience. I care more about games than I do being able to play a DVD on a system, or an achievements/trophy system. I could play a DVD on a DVD player or PS2 if I wanted to, I don't need every console ever to have a DVD feature. And I never gave a sh*t about achievements on the 360. they were kinda neat, but nothing that actually motivated me to keep on playing a game. That plus I'm pretty sure Nintendo will have some sort of acheivement system, or atleast give devlopers the freedom to ad achievements to their games, in whcih case I don't see why a lack of an achievement system is being brought up.

No online? the Wii-U is definitely going to be onlineand have online play, just like the 3DS. The 3DS's online is a much bigger improvement over the Wii's and it shows that Nintendo is taking it more seriously. I'm sure the Wii-U's online will be as good if not better.

And if consumers are enjoying Nintendo's products, then are they really getting bamboozling them? If you don't like what Nintendo is doing, than fine, that's your peroative. But in the end that's all it is, your personal preference. I love how people always have to make out something a company is doing that they do not like as some sort of sick, personal betrayal directed at them, as if Nintendo are evil, back-stabbing blackhearts who want to steal everyone's money as they twirl their mustaches and cackle.

In the end Nintendo is simply taking another direction and simply attemping to broaden their audience, like every other business that has ever existed, and you just so happen to not personally like said direction. Perhaps they aren't doing a great job of broadening their appeal but that hardly equates to them trying to "bamboozle" people or scamming them of money.

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

If you're content with what Nintendo decides to give you, fine and good, but don't minimize the importance of their decisions.

SuperFlakeman

Technological progress still happens even in Nintendo's case, just slower and steadier.

I prefer it this way since the negative consequences heavily outweigh the gain, i.e. death of the mid-tier dev, michael bay syndrome, no place for risk taking due to mega budgets, etc.)

This video sums up my thoughts on the PS3/360 environment, and the reason why I have to restrict myself to PC and Nintendo platforms: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6d_bq8aFA4

Although admittedly there are a few PS3/360 exclusive gems aswell. Hopefully these will find their way over to PC next gen so that I can simply ignore Sony and MS systems altogether.

The video focuses on the E3, which favors bombast and doesn't reflect the full scope of releases on the PS3 and X360. For example, the two recent releases people are talking about are the stealth/action Dishonored and the turn based X-com.

Also, while all things being equal, lower development costs are better, Nintendo's core gamers are extremely franchise loyal (even Nintendo/Miyamoto games get ignored if they aren't attached to a popular character) so small developers quickly reached the conclusion that the Wii was not a good place for mid tier developers and the original games they tend to make (small and medium developers tend not to have megafranchises they can release all of their games under).

Let's look at how original games have done on the cheaper Wii vs the more expensive PS3 and X360. On the Wii the launch window Red Steel and NMH put up decent numbers, but everything else (including Muramusa, Zack and Wiki, Little King's Story and Madworld) sold poorly. On the PS3 and X360 there are quite a few original games that have done well (nods towards Demon's Souls, Gears of War, Littlebigplanet, Dead Space, Borderlands, Assassin's Creed and Heavy Rain). its a remarkable phenomena because historically speaking, the console with the biggest userbase has always been the best place for smaller developers (1% of 100,000,000 is better than 1% of 50,000,000) but Nintendo's core gamers are famously conservative and most of the people who bought the Wii are casuals who are indifferent to core games of any stripe.

Also, its worth bearing in mind that while the middle tier is having problems at retail, some of that is due to the ever increasing ambitions/quality of downloadable games (nods towards Journey, Minecraft, Bastion, Limbo, Scott Pilgrim, Shadow Complex, Pixeljunk Monsters and Sound Shapes). Given that you are also a PC gamer (most PC developers not making subscription based games stay well clear of the PC's ever expanding limits) its strange you looked past indie games.

I've been gaming for a very long time and I can remember when title screens were the only chance gamers got to see the characters as envisioned by their creators so I love how close many modern games are to the original visions of their creators. CarnageHeart

I'm with you there. I've been gaming since the 2600. Maybe that's a reason why I don't feel that graphics today are inadequate. But I honestly believe that a game developer today can create whatever game world they desire, with the current technology. The problem mostly being creative, or looking to replicate another successful game.

Of course, more processing power allows not only better graphics, but more stuff onscreen (denser level geometry, more enemies and friends onscreen and bigger worlds). CarnageHeart

Paper Mario has how many characters onscreen? And Kameo. Dynasty Warriors. Brutal Legend. And many, many others. Look at the sandboxes in Just Cause, Skyrim, GTA4 (and who knows how much more - I don't play a lot of sandbox games). Again, I think we're at a point where the developer's creativity or design is more of a problem than the technology.

If you're content with what Nintendo decides to give you, fine and good, but don't minimize the importance of their decisions. CarnageHeart

I don't think I'm minimizing it. I just think people have already unfairly dismissed today's hardware as ancient and weak. With more power than the current gen, imagine what Nintendo will do, seeing how well Mario Galaxy turned out (technically) on the Wii. And the 3rd party stuff will be nice as well.

I'm also of the belief that the next Xbox and PS4 will not be a huge technical leap over today's consoles, and that the WiiU can compete with them because the difference of what's seen on the TV screen will not be great.

[QUOTE="SuperFlakeman"]

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

If you're content with what Nintendo decides to give you, fine and good, but don't minimize the importance of their decisions.

CarnageHeart

Technological progress still happens even in Nintendo's case, just slower and steadier.

I prefer it this way since the negative consequences heavily outweigh the gain, i.e. death of the mid-tier dev, michael bay syndrome, no place for risk taking due to mega budgets, etc.)

This video sums up my thoughts on the PS3/360 environment, and the reason why I have to restrict myself to PC and Nintendo platforms: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6d_bq8aFA4

Although admittedly there are a few PS3/360 exclusive gems aswell. Hopefully these will find their way over to PC next gen so that I can simply ignore Sony and MS systems altogether.

The video focuses on the E3, which favors bombast and doesn't reflect the full scope of releases on the PS3 and X360. For example, the two recent releases people are talking about are the stealth/action Dishonored and the turn based X-com.

Also, while all things being equal, lower development costs are better, Nintendo's core gamers are extremely franchise loyal (even Nintendo/Miyamoto games get ignored if they aren't attached to a popular character) so small developers quickly reached the conclusion that the Wii was not a good place for mid tier developers and the original games they tend to make (small and medium developers tend not to have megafranchises they can release all of their games under).

Let's look at how original games have done on the cheaper Wii vs the more expensive PS3 and X360. On the Wii the launch window Red Steel and NMH put up decent numbers, but everything else (including Muramusa, Zack and Wiki, Little King's Story and Madworld) sold poorly. On the PS3 and X360 there are quite a few original games that have done well (nods towards Demon's Souls, Gears of War, Littlebigplanet, Dead Space, Borderlands, Assassin's Creed and Heavy Rain). its a remarkable phenomena because historically speaking, the console with the biggest userbase has always been the best place for smaller developers (1% of 100,000,000 is better than 1% of 50,000,000) but Nintendo's core gamers are famously conservative and most of the people who bought the Wii are casuals who are indifferent to core games of any stripe.

Also, its worth bearing in mind that while the middle tier is having problems at retail, some of that is due to the ever increasing ambitions/quality of downloadable games (nods towards Journey, Minecraft, Bastion, Limbo, Scott Pilgrim, Shadow Complex, Pixeljunk Monsters and Sound Shapes). Given that you are also a PC gamer (most PC developers not making subscription based games stay well clear of the PC's ever expanding limits) its strange you looked past indie games.

What makes you think I looked past indie games? :P

When I say I game on the PC I mean indie games on Steam. Meat boy, spacechem, bastion, world of goo and many more. I'm all for low budget gaming.

And I hope I didn't give the impression that I think Wii is an ideal system. What I said applies to PS1 and PS2 aswell. You do realize PS3 cost Sony $800 to produce per unit. That kind of technological jump is insane.

Would it hurt to wait 6 years before getting into 720p gaming, and an additional 6 years from now before we go 1080p? I don't get it, what's the hurry?

Wii U being sold at a loss.dvader654

I'm also of the belief that the next Xbox and PS4 will not be a huge technical leap over today's consoles, and that the WiiU can compete with them because the difference of what's seen on the TV screen will not be great.

Grieverr

That prediction strikes me as fanciful.

It is safe to assume that both the PS4 and XB3 will be looking to run, among other things, Unreal Engine 4, which will offer a huge leap over current gen tech.

There's also zero evidence that Sony and MS are ignoring the PC benchmarks regarding graphic fidelity and regardless, even a modest increase in graphical output would leave the Wii U in the proverbial dust.

More than likely the Wii U will suffer from the same fate as the Wii in regards to developmental priority once third party developers start making games for the technologically superior MS and Sony consoles.

It is safe to assume that both the PS4 and XB3 will be looking to run, among other things, Unreal Engine 4, which will offer a huge leap over current gen tech.Grammaton-Cleric

I'd go one step further and say it's guaranteed. One look at how often the Unreal Engine 3 was used this gen proves that middleware like that is practically essential nowadays. Not supporting it would be practically suicidal.

You do realize PS3 cost Sony $800 to produce per unit. That kind of technological jump is insane.

SuperFlakeman

The initial price of the PS3 had nothing to do with a technological shift but rather Sony's decision to foist the Bluray format onto the consumer by shoehorning it into every console. They also included the PS2 chipset into every original system, a decision that significantly increased manufacturing costs.

Without those two additions the PS3 would have sold for the same price as the XB360.

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]It is safe to assume that both the PS4 and XB3 will be looking to run, among other things, Unreal Engine 4, which will offer a huge leap over current gen tech.c_rake

I'd go one step further and say it's guaranteed. One look at how often the Unreal Engine 3 was used this gen proves that middleware like that is practically essential nowadays. Not supporting it would be practically suicidal.

Agreed.

I'm curious if the Wii U will be able to run a scaled-down version of U4 or will instead be forced to stick to U3?

Wii U being sold at a loss.

dvader654

At least the 3DS is now profitable.

I think the tablet has screwed them over here. PLain and simple. I really really hope MS and Sony dont screw themselves over by including a stupid tablet. I sincerely believe that they can produce a powerful next gen system with a 2011 GPU, quad core processor and 4GB of RAM for $400.

Please no gimmicks. Please no gimmicks.

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

[QUOTE="SuperFlakeman"]

I can't decide what's more funny, this article or the fact that people think it's ok to directly convert yen->dollar.

Doesn't work like that guys.

To get the dollar equivalent price from yen you typically divide the yen amount by 100. So, 13400 Yen = $134. The price of the gamepad will most likely be close to this figure.

SuperFlakeman

I found a currency converter and entered in the numbers and it spit out the conversion as 169.44 in U.S. dollars so I'm unsure as to where you are getting your information because what they claimed seems accurate.

Your process seems far less reliable, especially since it wouldn't account for fluctuations in currency value, which shift consistently. (The converter I used is up to date on exchange rates)

For example a new PS3 game in Euros is typically 60 euros, whereas the same game in the US costs $60. I.e. the conversion factor is 1, for the typical PS3/360 multiplat.

Calculating it the normal way, we get that $60 translates to 46.01 euros, in other words we Europeans actually pay ~33% more than NA's for games, for no reason. It's an arbitrary markup.

The factor between Japan and NA is usually ~100.

We're not talking about Euros but rather Yen and the numbers published in that article were accurate.

Whether they choose to lower the price when releasing the controller stateside is entirely incidental.

And even assuming the controller is released at a lower price point here in the states, it is safe to assume it will carry an SRP of well over one hundred dollars. (Probably closer to 150)

At least the 3DS is now profitable.

I think the tablet has screwed them over here. PLain and simple. I really really hope MS and Sony dont screw themselves over by including a stupid tablet. I sincerely believe that they can produce a powerful next gen system with a 2011 GPU, quad core processor and 4GB of RAM for $400.

Please no gimmicks. Please no gimmicks.

S0lidSnake

Microsoft's got Smart Glass for tablet functionality, so they're already covered. Sony's got Move to fall back if they decide they need something extra. Most of the development costs are going into the consoles themselves, I'm willing to bet. Would be stupid to add a tablet to those costs. The price of the Wii U's gamepad clearly illustrates as much.

[QUOTE="c_rake"]

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]It is safe to assume that both the PS4 and XB3 will be looking to run, among other things, Unreal Engine 4, which will offer a huge leap over current gen tech.Grammaton-Cleric

I'd go one step further and say it's guaranteed. One look at how often the Unreal Engine 3 was used this gen proves that middleware like that is practically essential nowadays. Not supporting it would be practically suicidal.

Agreed.

I'm curious if the Wii U will be able to run a scaled-down version of U4 or will instead be forced to stick to U3?

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

At least the 3DS is now profitable.

I think the tablet has screwed them over here. PLain and simple. I really really hope MS and Sony dont screw themselves over by including a stupid tablet. I sincerely believe that they can produce a powerful next gen system with a 2011 GPU, quad core processor and 4GB of RAM for $400.

Please no gimmicks. Please no gimmicks.

c_rake

Microsoft's got Smart Glass for tablet functionality, so they're already covered. Sony's got Move to fall back if they decide they need something extra. Most of the development costs are going into the consoles themselves, I'm willing to bet. Would be stupid to add a tablet to those costs. The price of the Wii U's gamepad clearly illustrates as much.

The big question for Microsoft is Kinect: they're rumored to be making a "Kinect 2", which may or may not be bundled with the console. If it's bundled with the console I expect the console's overall power to take a hit as Microsoft will have to be able to keep the specs lower to keep the price down. On the other hand, if they have it as a seperate add-on the console could be significantly powerful.

But then again, if they choose not to bundle it in they face the problem of convincing people to buy Kinect AGAIN, which I'm not sure consumers would be willing to do if they had already purchased the device for the 360.

The big question for Microsoft is Kinect: they're rumored to be making a "Kinect 2", which may or may not be bundled with the console. If it's bundled with the console I expect the console's overall power to take a hit as Microsoft will have to be able to keep the specs lower to keep the price down. On the other hand, if they have it as a seperate add-on the console could be significantly powerful.

But then again, if they choose not to bundle it in they face the problem of convincing people to buy Kinect AGAIN, which I'm not sure consumers would be willing to do if they had already purchased the device for the 360.

Vari3ty

Packing it in seems like the thing they'd do for a separate hardware tier at a premium price. Too much money to made in keeping it a separate add-on to pack it in across the board.

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"][QUOTE="dvader654"]Wii U being sold at a loss.dvader654

[QUOTE="Vari3ty"]

The big question for Microsoft is Kinect: they're rumored to be making a "Kinect 2", which may or may not be bundled with the console. If it's bundled with the console I expect the console's overall power to take a hit as Microsoft will have to be able to keep the specs lower to keep the price down. On the other hand, if they have it as a seperate add-on the console could be significantly powerful.

But then again, if they choose not to bundle it in they face the problem of convincing people to buy Kinect AGAIN, which I'm not sure consumers would be willing to do if they had already purchased the device for the 360.

c_rake

Packing it in seems like the thing they'd do for a separate hardware tier at a premium price. Too much money to made in keeping it a separate add-on to pack it in across the board.

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

At least the 3DS is now profitable.

I think the tablet has screwed them over here. PLain and simple. I really really hope MS and Sony dont screw themselves over by including a stupid tablet. I sincerely believe that they can produce a powerful next gen system with a 2011 GPU, quad core processor and 4GB of RAM for $400.

Please no gimmicks. Please no gimmicks.

c_rake

Microsoft's got Smart Glass for tablet functionality, so they're already covered. Sony's got Move to fall back if they decide they need something extra. Most of the development costs are going into the consoles themselves, I'm willing to bet. Would be stupid to add a tablet to those costs. The price of the Wii U's gamepad clearly illustrates as much.

I'd think Sony would make a big push for Vita-PS4 connectivity, maybe even going as far as using it as a tablet of sorts.

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

[QUOTE="c_rake"]

I'd go one step further and say it's guaranteed. One look at how often the Unreal Engine 3 was used this gen proves that middleware like that is practically essential nowadays. Not supporting it would be practically suicidal.

Zen_Light

Agreed.

I'm curious if the Wii U will be able to run a scaled-down version of U4 or will instead be forced to stick to U3?

People have made this speculation every generation and they have been proven incorrect each and every time.

At this juncture both Sony and MS could release systems priced at $350-399 that would offer massive leaps over current gen while leaving the Wii U coughing exhaust in their respective wakes.

And if any of those spec rumors are even remotely true, both the PS4 and NextXB are looking to eclipse the Wii U in the same manner as the PS3 and XB360 eclipsed the Wii.

To think that this console industry as a whole is going to predicate their entire developmental model on technology from 2006 is unrealistic.