its kinda scary nintendo is still using a cpu from the 90s on todays consoles. mind you it is a better version but damn!
osirisx3
Well, for Nintendo's own games and games made ground-up for WiiU, the CPU won't be a problem.
It may be a different matter when it comes to multi-plats and ports from other systems, however.
But truth be told, I don't think any Nintendo system was all that "dev friendly" to begin with.
For example the NES had problems with sprite flicker if the spites were too big, slowdown if much was happening at once due to relatively slow CPU, only one paralax layer limit, a rather limited color output and a limited sound chip.
If you wanted better than that, you were better off getting a Sega Master System or better yet a NEC Turbografx-16, which had superior graphics and sound. (they even put that up in commercials such as this one)
The SNES also wasn't that easy to develop for due to it's relatively slow CPU altho Nintendo came up with "enhancement chips" such as DSP, SA-1 and Super FX which allowed for games otherwise not possible on the SNES. (you can read about them here)
And the N64 was really a "cluster****" of hardware and software oversight such as limited cartridge space, locked micro-codes, small texture memory (was the same as on PS1 but PS1 could store them in the V-RAM and stream from the CD), high memory latencies, ect., depite otherwise being a more advanced system than the 32-bit CD competition. (the machine received a hardware "boost" in the form of the memory expansion, i.e. "Expansion Pak")
GC fixed a lot of that but still it had a smaller storage space than the competition ("mini DVDs"), non-existent online play (only PSO supported it if I'm not mistaken) and generally, some effort had to be put into programming to get similar effects as on the stronger competition (read: Xbox), hence the system suffered a lot of "watered-down" direct ports from the PS2.
Ironically, the Wii was their most "balanced" system, as it improved what was holding back the GC (more RAM, higher clocks, bigger storage, online, ect.), but it was impressive only for last gen standards.
It had only DX7-level graphics hardware (360 & PS3 DX9-level) so multi-plat games had to be tonned down severely or redesigned completely.
If they put a better GPU in there, the system could output it's games in HD resolutions and ports like CoD: Modern Warfare would be a lot better too.
The WiiU fixes these issues but also has a fair share of shortcommings.
But I think a lot of these issues can be resolved with clever programming as well as future system updates.
If we go by "next-gen specs" speculations, it seems the next Xbox and PS will use a similar setup as the WiiU, i.e. lower clocked CPU + GPGPU design. (as well as possibly touch-screen controllers)
They could very well just be "stronger WiiUs".
The WiiU's GPU is also DX10.1-level and scaling down from DX11-level to DX10.1-level is much easier than it was from DX9-level to DX7-level.
Of course there's the question if people want to see these scaled-down ports, but the possibility is there.
But I personally think a good mixture of 1st party and selected 3rd party games (ideally built ground-up for the WiiU) may suffice for most gamers interested in the system.
Log in to comment