Excellent Article on Wii U's place in the Next Generation

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by optimal_saint (25 posts) -
Makes sense. Hope he's right. http://gengame.net/2012/07/wii-u-will-not-be-behind-next-generation/
#2 Posted by Sphensen (788 posts) -

I've read this article a while ago. I agree with it, but you have the delusional crowd who feel that their next console will be a T2 despite the actual limations of the industry.

#3 Posted by blueydwlf (385 posts) -

Best article I've read in a long time. Agree whole heartedly with it.

#4 Posted by Sepewrath (28770 posts) -
A point I've made many times, the cost of games cant just simply continue to see dramatic rises. This gen has all but seen to the death of the middle tier release, if games cost anymore, even big budget games would die off. Most AAA games aren't going to do 8 million, even when spread across multiple consoles. That would mean get ready for a future of less games, with far less creativity, because on the sure fire MEGA hit is getting the green light. Even if MS and Sony were dumb enough to go for another huge jump, despite the cost, people are such short sighted fools to want it.
#5 Posted by NaveedLife (17179 posts) -

While he has points and I agree with half of it, parts of it really irk me. He acts at one point like it is just frikkin great that companies are making mini game compilations, health and fitness games, and so on. It is not great. I don't give a damn about those. I DO care about the high budget ZombiU game though. Of course I can appreciate somewhat lower budget games like NSMBU (looks awesome) and Rayman Legends. I own Torchlight 2 and other lower budget games. That is all well and good, but to act like graphics don't matter and we should just make piece of crap games, is unnacceptable. And to act like the Wii offered enough innovation to make up for it's poor hardware is laughable. So let me get this straight, in this bad economy, I WANT to pay $250 for a gamecube with motion controls? Don't be stupid.

What it all comes down to though is if I like the games or not. The WiiU looks very promising so far, but I hope Zelda and metroid see a return to their former glory and base in exploratoin. if this happens I will be more than happy to support the WiiU (I already am considering it, but cannot pre-order anymore).

#6 Posted by SuperFlakeman (7342 posts) -

While he has points and I agree with half of it, parts of it really irk me. He acts at one point like it is just frikkin great that companies are making mini game compilations, health and fitness games, and so on. It is not great. I don't give a damn about those. I DO care about the high budget ZombiU game though. Of course I can appreciate somewhat lower budget games like NSMBU (looks awesome) and Rayman Legends. I own Torchlight 2 and other lower budget games. That is all well and good, but to act like graphics don't matter and we should just make piece of crap games, is unnacceptable. And to act like the Wii offered enough innovation to make up for it's poor hardware is laughable. So let me get this straight, in this bad economy, I WANT to pay $250 for a gamecube with motion controls? Don't be stupid.

What it all comes down to though is if I like the games or not. The WiiU looks very promising so far, but I hope Zelda and metroid see a return to their former glory and base in exploratoin. if this happens I will be more than happy to support the WiiU (I already am considering it, but cannot pre-order anymore).

NaveedLife

This text translates to "they don't make the type of games I want = crap"

Pretty sad mindset.

Bolded parts are especially disturbing to me. As if "mini game compilations" are inherently bad games (Wii Sports won the second best game of 2006 on IGN). Don't be surprised to find Nintendo Land in GOTY nominee lists, it may even win a couple.

Next, "return to their former glory" is complete nonsense. SS has a 93% metascore, nominated for GOTY everywhere and it got a 10/10 on IGN.

Wake up.

#7 Posted by blueydwlf (385 posts) -

While he has points and I agree with half of it, parts of it really irk me. He acts at one point like it is just frikkin great that companies are making mini game compilations, health and fitness games, and so on. It is not great. I don't give a damn about those. I DO care about the high budget ZombiU game though. Of course I can appreciate somewhat lower budget games like NSMBU (looks awesome) and Rayman Legends. I own Torchlight 2 and other lower budget games. That is all well and good, but to act like graphics don't matter and we should just make piece of crap games, is unnacceptable. And to act like the Wii offered enough innovation to make up for it's poor hardware is laughable. So let me get this straight, in this bad economy, I WANT to pay $250 for a gamecube with motion controls? Don't be stupid.

What it all comes down to though is if I like the games or not. The WiiU looks very promising so far, but I hope Zelda and metroid see a return to their former glory and base in exploratoin. if this happens I will be more than happy to support the WiiU (I already am considering it, but cannot pre-order anymore).

NaveedLife
I don't believe the article is saying graphics don't matter. More that where we are at a technical standpoint is very good and that trying to jump leagues ahead of this again with the next console generation will cause more harm to the industry than good in the long run. I think the Wii U will strike a goof balance being more powerful and capable than the PS/360 but not the crazy jump in power people are speculating in Sony and MS next systems.
#8 Posted by ekalbtwin (1044 posts) -
Very refreshing read. I have been stumped by a lot of dev's current attitude that only "teh most powaful gamez can winz!" stance, when the highest selling games this gen completely stomp their closes competition and are not on the "real Gen" systems. Wii sports resort has sold over 15 million copies, and to really piss off all the lems and sheep, the best selling racer this gen is easily Mario Kart Wii, which broke the 20 million mark. I enjoy a high end game as much as the next gamer, but do any of you out there think that halo 4, which had effen better be miles better than Mario Kart Wii, will come close to selling 20 million? Making the Wii U powerful enough to curb stomp the PS4 and Durango (what a lame name....) is suicide.
#20 Posted by NaveedLife (17179 posts) -

[QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

While he has points and I agree with half of it, parts of it really irk me. He acts at one point like it is just frikkin great that companies are making mini game compilations, health and fitness games, and so on. It is not great. I don't give a damn about those. I DO care about the high budget ZombiU game though. Of course I can appreciate somewhat lower budget games like NSMBU (looks awesome) and Rayman Legends. I own Torchlight 2 and other lower budget games. That is all well and good, but to act like graphics don't matter and we should just make piece of crap games, is unnacceptable. And to act like the Wii offered enough innovation to make up for it's poor hardware is laughable. So let me get this straight, in this bad economy, I WANT to pay $250 for a gamecube with motion controls? Don't be stupid.

What it all comes down to though is if I like the games or not. The WiiU looks very promising so far, but I hope Zelda and metroid see a return to their former glory and base in exploratoin. if this happens I will be more than happy to support the WiiU (I already am considering it, but cannot pre-order anymore).

SuperFlakeman

This text translates to "they don't make the type of games I want = crap"

Pretty sad mindset.

Bolded parts are especially disturbing to me. As if "mini game compilations" are inherently bad games (Wii Sports won the second best game of 2006 on IGN). Don't be surprised to find Nintendo Land in GOTY nominee lists, it may even win a couple.

Next, "return to their former glory" is complete nonsense. SS has a 93% metascore, nominated for GOTY everywhere and it got a 10/10 on IGN.

Wake up.

Take a poll on the Wii forums asking for peopels favorite games. I guarantee you Wii Sports, Wario Ware, and Wii fit games will NOT be in the top 5. Super mario Galaxy 1 and 2, Monster Hunter, Metroid Prime 3, Other M, Xenoblade, The Last Story, and more will be. cause gamers want big, full fledged games (in addition to the occasional mini game compilation and such). I love all types of games, but you have to have BOTH (preferably more of the full fledged games). Don't tell me that the vast majority of people on here are more excited for Just Sing than they are ZombiU.

I am simply saying if I could pick 10 games to buy next year, Wii fit, Just Sing, and so on, are NOT going to be in that list. Nintendo Land does show promise though.

As for my comment about former glory. I stand by it. Oh! SS has a 93 on metacritic!? Now I love it more than all the others combined! :) Wait...no I don't. and it is the lowest metascore for any of the 3D Zelda's, so what are you trying to prove? No one can deny that Metroid and Zelda saw a change. If you liked this change and lack of exploration, great! I am glad you were not dissapointed in the slightest. But for me, I am oldschool and miss the preWii games in the series. The Wii ones are good, but not as good. I hope WiiU brings that back.

#21 Posted by KBFloYd (14404 posts) -

[QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

While he has points and I agree with half of it, parts of it really irk me. He acts at one point like it is just frikkin great that companies are making mini game compilations, health and fitness games, and so on. It is not great. I don't give a damn about those. I DO care about the high budget ZombiU game though. Of course I can appreciate somewhat lower budget games like NSMBU (looks awesome) and Rayman Legends. I own Torchlight 2 and other lower budget games. That is all well and good, but to act like graphics don't matter and we should just make piece of crap games, is unnacceptable. And to act like the Wii offered enough innovation to make up for it's poor hardware is laughable. So let me get this straight, in this bad economy, I WANT to pay $250 for a gamecube with motion controls? Don't be stupid.

What it all comes down to though is if I like the games or not. The WiiU looks very promising so far, but I hope Zelda and metroid see a return to their former glory and base in exploratoin. if this happens I will be more than happy to support the WiiU (I already am considering it, but cannot pre-order anymore).

SuperFlakeman

This text translates to "they don't make the type of games I want = crap"

pretty much this... good job owning this fool..he was beginning to get a little too confident lol

this guy is the new jasonguy

#22 Posted by NaveedLife (17179 posts) -

[QUOTE="SuperFlakeman"]

[QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

While he has points and I agree with half of it, parts of it really irk me. He acts at one point like it is just frikkin great that companies are making mini game compilations, health and fitness games, and so on. It is not great. I don't give a damn about those. I DO care about the high budget ZombiU game though. Of course I can appreciate somewhat lower budget games like NSMBU (looks awesome) and Rayman Legends. I own Torchlight 2 and other lower budget games. That is all well and good, but to act like graphics don't matter and we should just make piece of crap games, is unnacceptable. And to act like the Wii offered enough innovation to make up for it's poor hardware is laughable. So let me get this straight, in this bad economy, I WANT to pay $250 for a gamecube with motion controls? Don't be stupid.

What it all comes down to though is if I like the games or not. The WiiU looks very promising so far, but I hope Zelda and metroid see a return to their former glory and base in exploratoin. if this happens I will be more than happy to support the WiiU (I already am considering it, but cannot pre-order anymore).

KBFloYd

This text translates to "they don't make the type of games I want = crap"

pretty much this... XD

this guy is the new jason guy of the nintendo forums..

locopatho comes close too but luckily he stays away.

Why do you hate me? I express an opinion about a console I want to buy and I get hated on for any critiqueing and discussion. Should I just throw my money at Nintendo without even thinking?

#23 Posted by KBFloYd (14404 posts) -

Why do you hate me? I express an opinion about a console I want to buy and I get hated on for any critiqueing and discussion. Should I just throw my money at Nintendo without even thinking?

NaveedLife

your the only one who acts like this...on a consistant basis.. you stand out... i'm sorry... you and jasonguy.

#24 Posted by svaubel (2566 posts) -

Very good read. Really brings to light the industry's problems and why I believe Nintendo will be just fine next gen. But of course the devs/pubs will blame it all on us, the consumers for their problems.

#25 Posted by NaveedLife (17179 posts) -

[QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

Why do you hate me? I express an opinion about a console I want to buy and I get hated on for any critiqueing and discussion. Should I just throw my money at Nintendo without even thinking?

KBFloYd

your the only one who acts like this...on a consistant basis.. you stand out... i'm sorry... you and jasonguy.

ON a board full of fanboys, I may come across as a hater, but what I really am is realistic. I am not even saying everything I say is right, I am discussing things. I want to hear peoples feelings and opinions on the matter, rather than being bashed for my own.

I just see things he put in his article and it almost sounds like he thinks things like voice acting are poor decisions. Maybe I am misunderstanding what the author means, but he came across like that. If he thinks Nintendo can't afford to, maybe he should talk to indie devs of Torchlight 2 or Path of Exile. I mean I understand not going overboard on all the titles and such. Mario doesn't need VA. 2D mario doesn't need crazy graphics (love NSMBU graphics). Smash Bros doesn't need tons of cinematics. I get that, but I do want HD. I do want Zelda and Metroid to push the quality and yes it will require more money.

There is need for both. But if noone pushes tech or developes for it, it will never progress. And Iwata says he loves nice graphics and all, but that he needs to wait for it to make sense to use them. Well if everyone took Iwata's stance, graphics would never progress.

#26 Posted by Sepewrath (28770 posts) -

And if everyone just took the stance of graphics is king, games would never progress. Like I said in my first post, that stuff doesn't come free and the more a game cost the more it has to sell. Cant exactly make that risky game or try anything innovative, when 5 million copies has to be a guarantee at full price out the gate. The idea of just throwing tech at a wall and seeing what sticks, is nothing but a pretty dead end for gaming.

And I would have to agree with SuperFlakeman, the people on this board are not the only people to play games. Go out into the general population and ask if they like Assassin's Creed or Mass Effect and you'll get a blank stare. Some people like to play Wii Sports or Guitar Hero or whatever as much as some like to play CoD. There always has been and always will be enough room for both types to exist, as long as gaming doesn't become to big to support its own weight. You think by adding more tech, you'll get more Halo, Zelda etc. The reality is you'll get less, and things like Zelda will need even more mass appeal so they don't go broke making it.

#27 Posted by NaveedLife (17179 posts) -

And if everyone just took the stance of graphics is king, games would never progress. Like I said in my first post, that stuff doesn't come free and the more a game cost the more it has to sell. Cant exactly make that risky game or try anything innovative, when 5 million copies has to be a guarantee at full price out the gate. The idea of just throwing tech at a wall and seeing what sticks, is nothing but a pretty dead end for gaming.

And I would have to agree with SuperFlakeman, the people on this board are not the only people to play games. Go out into the general population and ask if they like Assassin's Creed or Mass Effect and you'll get a blank stare. Some people like to play Wii Sports or Guitar Hero or whatever as much as some like to play CoD. There always has been and always will be enough room for both types to exist, as long as gaming doesn't become to big to support its own weight. You think by adding more tech, you'll get more Halo, Zelda etc. The reality is you'll get less, and things like Zelda will need even more mass appeal so they don't go broke making it.

Sepewrath

While you are right and I agree with you, you must also agree that if no one pushes graphcis and developes for advanced tech, graphics would not be progressing or getting cheaper to develope with?

Wii sports and all those other more casual games are fine. Make them. That is fine and dandy. But as you pointed out, both need to exist. I don't care if there is casual games. I like some of them myself. But if I had to live on them and the gaming industry focused on them, I would be very sad. I am a gamer. And there is a market for gamers. If everyone goes casual, they will all lose. Just as if everyone goes hardcore, they will all lose. We do need the mix, I agree, I just don't think beautiful graphics, voice, acting, and all that wonderful stuff, is always the enemy here. I am pretty sure none of us played Resident Evil 4 for the first time and said "omg, this is disgusting! How could they put so much effort into graphics!? And what is this high presentation value? I need to stop right now!"

As I said above, not all games need VA. Not all games need story. Not all games need scenes. Not all games need mind blowing graphics. BUT it is nice to see this stuff in titles that deserve it. Zelda, Metroid and more, are those titles. That doesn't mean I am only interested in those. I am excited for NSMBU and Rayman Legends. I am anticipating the indie title Grim Dawn (on PC) by the makers of Titan Quest. But I need my Zelda, Metroid, ZombiU and more, and I would like to see them stay current. I would like to see them with all the polish and beauty.

And I hate it when people act like graphcis don't matter and never add anything to gameplay. They do matter and can add to gameplay. But again, as I said above, certain things matter more for certain games.

PS - This is also why devs like Epic and Valve are smart. Source and Unreal allow for devs to crank out nice looking experiences with less work and therefore less money.

#28 Posted by Nickmanx5 (194 posts) -

it was a good read but some of you guys overeact to critiscim. the 1st time someone didnt agree you all jumped on him. i have a mixed opinion myself if you used some of this logic the wii would have been the ps2 of last gen and in terms of sells it was but quality no. in the end it depends on 3rd party support the wii was cheap to develop for too still didnt stop everyone from going ps360. but im all for wiiu if it means we can get some of the mid-tier developers making console games again. anyone remeber gamearts and looking foward to the next lunar/grandia or capcom making something besides re and fighters if the wii u can make that happen then im on board

#29 Posted by Sepewrath (28770 posts) -
When were graphics ever not advancing? MS and Sony made an insane jump, before it became cost effective to do so. No one is saying graphic tech should stagnate(at least I'm not) but it needs to be controlled burst, so that the quality of games don't suffer for the sake of a prettier picture. People don't seem to appreciate the long term effect of doing that. I would say where graphics are now is fine, I mean look at your sig and you really think a large jump is necessary at this point? That's on current gen tech and the Wii U is capable of more, would you not consider that "polish and beauty"? They are trying to make an open world MGS game, you think they would try that if it cost 4x as much make, even before marketing? I don't think so.
#30 Posted by blueydwlf (385 posts) -
When were graphics ever not advancing? MS and Sony made an insane jump, before it became cost effective to do so. No one is saying graphic tech should stagnate(at least I'm not) but it needs to be controlled burst, so that the quality of games don't suffer for the sake of a prettier picture. People don't seem to appreciate the long term effect of doing that. I would say where graphics are now is fine, I mean look at your sig and you really think a large jump is necessary at this point? That's on current gen tech and the Wii U is capable of more, would you not consider that "polish and beauty"? They are trying to make an open world MGS game, you think they would try that if it cost 4x as much make, even before marketing? I don't think so. Sepewrath
^This. Basically what I was saying.
#31 Posted by NaveedLife (17179 posts) -

When were graphics ever not advancing? MS and Sony made an insane jump, before it became cost effective to do so. No one is saying graphic tech should stagnate(at least I'm not) but it needs to be controlled burst, so that the quality of games don't suffer for the sake of a prettier picture. People don't seem to appreciate the long term effect of doing that. I would say where graphics are now is fine, I mean look at your sig and you really think a large jump is necessary at this point? That's on current gen tech and the Wii U is capable of more, would you not consider that "polish and beauty"? They are trying to make an open world MGS game, you think they would try that if it cost 4x as much make, even before marketing? I don't think so. Sepewrath

I willl list some points here (some of which I am not 100% sure I am right on)

  1. Current gen tech...yes...not the Wii. If PS and Xbox didn't push tech and have devs using it for developement, do you really think it would have been cost effective for Nintendo to jump on board now, or would it just have prolonged the same outcome (more or less)? If no one is using it, the companies won't make it, and the developers won't learn it. Someone has to pioneer.
  2. Where the heck did I say that my sig is not polish and beauty enough? It looks AMAZING. THough don't kid yourself, it is likely running on PC, so the WiiU could match that more or less I expect.
  3. I am not bashing the WiiU, saying I am dissapointed with it, or saying that we should make $1000 consoles with $80 games. I am just syaing, I don't think all of the articles points make sense, and that at times, the author comes off as if voice acting, nice graphics, and so on, are just too much most of the time, which is not the case.

Bottom line is I think everyone has some points here, and we all want to see good games. I THINK the WiiU will deliver, though I am waiting to see. I still want to get one soon, and am very hyped for NSMBU, ZombiU and just the system in general :).

#32 Posted by superbuuman (3063 posts) -

Development cost & what they get back have a lot to do with it. We are at the point where the games looks good/real enough, yes even on PC, want to push for more means higher cost in development, are they getting back the money they put in?...doesn't seem like it, quite alot of studios are closing/have closed. The article does have some sound argument. People that are yelling for more power obviously are not getting it...just look at the rise in popularity of indie games. :)

#33 Posted by JordanElek (17995 posts) -

I am just syaing, I don't think all of the articles points make sense, and that at times, the author comes off as if voice acting, nice graphics, and so on, are just too much most of the time, which is not the case. NaveedLife
The only time the author mentions voice acting is in saying that game critics have a hard time giving proper respect to a really fun game if it doesn't have the most technically up-to-date production values. I don't think that's always true, but he isn't really saying that developers should just cut the production values in order to not spend too much on their game. He uses Nintendo as an example of a developer that has cut costs by simply creating different types of experiences that don't require them to compete with the gigantic-budget games but can net them more profit than those games. NSMB Wii is the ultimate example of that.

And he spends a lot of time quoting Nintendo's strategy of waiting till newer technology is wider spread and cheaper before diving into it. You're right that if everyone had that philosophy, progress would be slow, but not everyone has that philosophy, so Nintendo can profit from it while the technology drivers do their thing. But it shouldn't be surprising that the risk takers fail more often than Nintendo does. That's just part of the process, and they know what they're getting into when they take those risks. But more conservative companies like Nintendo can keep the ship afloat when the other guys occasionaly bite off more than they can chew.