Wii U tech on PS360 level, not 'next gen'

  • 67 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by coolwhip83 (88 posts) -

The last days I have been carefully reading the web to find out more about the tech that's inside the Wii U. Sadly there are no specs to be found yet. But there are various articles on this topic with quotes from actual developers. All seem to point in the same direction. A PS360 level of horsepower. 
 
Fran Mirabella (from IGN) on twitter: "Where's the quote "significantly"? That was during the rumor period, no doubt. Short story think Xbox360+. Concessions made."   This was a reply to my question wether or not IGN still thinks the Wii U is significantly more powerful than the PS3, like they said pre-E3.

Rayman creator Michel Ancel saying that the Wii U is not next-gen: 
http://www.videogamer.com/news/wii_u_is_not_next-gen_says_michel_ancel.html   

Several developers claiming Wii U is about 50% more powerful than the 360 (which isn't a lot, the previous leap from xbox to 360 was more in the 10 times as powerful region):
http://www.industrygamers.com/news/wii-u-is-actually-50-more-powerful-than-ps3---report/ 
 
John Carmack saying that Wii U is playing 'barely catch up' (at 10:15 in the video): 
http://www.giantbomb.com/e3-2011-a-word-with-john-carmack/17-4383/ 
 
So Nintendo really is just catching up to this gen. After 7 years (in 2012). At first I was disappointed, but maybe the next round of console is longer away than we might think. Check out the John Carmack interview, he does say that developers still didn't tap everything out of the 360 and PS3. I don't think Nintendo will be able to get the core gamers back with this strategy though. There is zero incentive for a PS3 or 360 owner to invest in a new console, that has the same tech inside of it.

#2 Posted by Yanngc33 (4496 posts) -

This is sounding more and more like the dreamcast...

#3 Posted by Icemael (6321 posts) -
@coolwhip83 said:
There is zero incentive for a PS3 or 360 owner to invest in a new console, that has the same tech inside of it.
Plenty of Playstation 3 owners buy Xbox 360 systems and vice versa. Do you know why?

Exclusives. And Nintendo have by far the strongest first-party developers. Think about it: new Super Mario, new The Legend of Zelda, new Metroid, new Donkey King, new Pikmin, new Super Smash Bros., new Mario Kart, new F-Zero, new Fire Emblem... I could go on. And that's just the first-party stuff. Throw a bunch of third-party exclusives and a controller with cool tech in, and the incentive is overwhelming.
#4 Posted by Azteck (7449 posts) -

Think about it: new Super Mario, new The Legend of Zelda, new Metroid, new Donkey King, new Pikmin, new Super Smash Bros., new Mario Kart, new F-Zero, new Fire Emblem
I find it hilarious that most of these titles have been produced by Nintendo since the 80's.
#5 Posted by coolwhip83 (88 posts) -
@Icemael: I don't really agree with that. People that like Nintendo games already own a Wii. Nintendo doesn't need to release a new console for that. The message Nintendo is sending out now is that they want both the core and the casuals. The core (I hate calling shooter fans core) won't buy the Wii U for those Nintendo games. 
#6 Posted by Claude (16254 posts) -
#7 Posted by Icemael (6321 posts) -
@Azteck said: 

Think about it: new Super Mario, new The Legend of Zelda, new Metroid, new Donkey King, new Pikmin, new Super Smash Bros., new Mario Kart, new F-Zero, new Fire Emblem
I find it hilarious that most of these titles have been produced by Nintendo since the 80's.
And most of them are still great.
 
@coolwhip83 said: 
@Icemael: I don't really agree with that. People that like Nintendo games already own a Wii. Nintendo doesn't need to release a new console for that. The message Nintendo is sending out now is that they want both the core and the casuals. The core (I hate calling shooter fans core) won't buy the Wii U for those Nintendo games. 
They're going to aim for better third-party support as well, obviously, but what do you think the primary incentive for most non-casual buyers will be? Mario. Metroid. The Legend of Zelda.

As for CoD-dudebros, I think Nintendo are well aware they won't buy the Wii U. They aren't going for those people. They're going for video game enthusiasts. The kind of people that'll happily buy a second and third console if there are enough exclusives that interest them. That's who they're referring to when they say "core gamers", not the dudes who are all set as long as they have a console that can play the latest Call of Duty.
#8 Posted by Cube (4366 posts) -
@Icemael said:
@Azteck said: 

Think about it: new Super Mario, new The Legend of Zelda, new Metroid, new Donkey King, new Pikmin, new Super Smash Bros., new Mario Kart, new F-Zero, new Fire Emblem
I find it hilarious that most of these titles have been produced by Nintendo since the 80's.
And most of them are still great.
 
@coolwhip83 said: 
@Icemael: I don't really agree with that. People that like Nintendo games already own a Wii. Nintendo doesn't need to release a new console for that. The message Nintendo is sending out now is that they want both the core and the casuals. The core (I hate calling shooter fans core) won't buy the Wii U for those Nintendo games. 
They're going to aim for better third-party support as well, obviously, but what do you think the primary incentive for most non-casual buyers will be? Mario. Metroid. The Legend of Zelda.

As for CoD-dudebros, I think Nintendo are well aware they won't buy the Wii U. They aren't going for those people. They're going for video game enthusiasts. The kind of people that'll happily buy a second and third console if there are enough exclusives that interest them. That's who they're referring to when they say "core gamers", not the dudes who are all set as long as they have a console that can play the latest Call of Duty.
This is untrue. 
 
If you think this time around, Nintendo isn't trying to get the CoD crowd, you're just weird. Iwata himself even referred to the sales of MW on Wii when he talked about the core players. Business is business. Of course Nintendo wants the CoD crowd...they want eveybody.  Hasn't anyone actually listened to Nintendo? That's what they want. A console EVERYONE can play, with games YOU want to play. CoD players are the very core players any of the big 3 refer to. Nintendo doesn't want to be second or third console with core players, that's the entire reason they're doing this. When Reggie was questioned a few years back about the fact that someone could buy a Wii and 360 for the same price as PS3, his response was roughly, "We want people to buy a Wii, games, and accessories for the price of PS3".  
 
Nintendo wants the market, I don't think they made the right move to get it. They're not immune to big mistakes, their track record is muddied with them.
#9 Posted by Pibo47 (3166 posts) -
@Yanngc33 said:

This is sounding more and more like the dreamcast...

Same here duder. I do think since the wii sold so well they can fuck around. But still...the wiiu does nothing for me.
#10 Posted by JasonR86 (9710 posts) -

I think I'm ok with this.  Considering how much money Microsoft is putting in to the kinect and Sony is putting in to 3D I really don't think those two company's will bring out new machines for a while despite advances in technology.  Why would they?  They still sell hardware like mad.  It doesn't make sense to get rid of your huge user-base if that base is still growing.

#11 Posted by Icemael (6321 posts) -
@Cube: The Call of Duty bros wants Call of Duty, and they already have it. So unless Nintendo has secured the next game in the series as an exclusive, no, I don't think that's who they're going for. It's obvious from their marketing and their lineup that they're trying to keep the people that buy fitness/party games while re-attracting the multi-console gaming enthusiasts, but I see nothing that indicates they're pushing for frat bros and 13-year-old kids that play Call of Duty and nothing else.
#12 Posted by Cube (4366 posts) -
@Icemael: But did Nintendo show anything that attracts video game enthusiasts?
#13 Posted by Icemael (6321 posts) -
@Cube: They announced and/or showed Zelda, Pikmin, Smash Bros. and a bunch of established, popular third-party franchises like DiRT and Assassin's Creed. 

And keep in mind that there's another E3 between now and the console's release. I expect they have plenty more in the works.
#14 Posted by RE_Player1 (7560 posts) -
I will probably end up getting it at launch if the price is right and if it's not I'll pick it up a couple years down the road although like others have said I get a Dreamcast vibe from this.
#15 Posted by shadystx (182 posts) -

I agree and disagree.
 
The fact its of similar horsepower to my 360/ps3 has me thinking well I dont really need one, But I bought both 360 and PS3 and I built a high end pc simply because I really want the option to be able to play as many of the very good games as I can and the only way that is possible is to own all systems, Fangirls may disagree but I believe every system has some excellent games worth playing.
 
I bought a wii and it was a huge disappointment, I enjoyed Mario and Zelda and thats about it, But the geek in me will probably buy a wii u the instance i see those games in hd.
 
It is a little annoying that Nintendo for the 2nd time are making a new console with old tech, This is better than the wii since really the wii's power was pretty much similar to last gen systems only with waggle.

#16 Posted by Orange (206 posts) -

@Yanngc33 said:

This is sounding more and more like the dreamcast...

Yeah, I have a slight feeling the launch isn't going to go as well as the Wii's...

#17 Posted by Cube (4366 posts) -
@Orange said:

@Yanngc33 said:

This is sounding more and more like the dreamcast...

Yeah, I have a slight feeling the launch isn't going to go as well as the Wii's...

It most likely won't, tons of people are saying "Never again" to Nintendo and their Wii strategy.
#18 Posted by Rolyatkcinmai (2687 posts) -

@Icemael said:

@coolwhip83 said:
There is zero incentive for a PS3 or 360 owner to invest in a new console, that has the same tech inside of it.
Plenty of Playstation 3 owners buy Xbox 360 systems and vice versa. Do you know why?

Exclusives. And Nintendo have by far the strongest first-party developers. Think about it: new Super Mario, new The Legend of Zelda, new Metroid, new Donkey King, new Pikmin, new Super Smash Bros., new Mario Kart, new F-Zero, new Fire Emblem... I could go on. And that's just the first-party stuff. Throw a bunch of third-party exclusives and a controller with cool tech in, and the incentive is overwhelming.

I'd argue they actually have the weakest. None of those are appealing and all but one are rehashes of super old franchises.

#19 Posted by Marokai (2977 posts) -

Depressing. I know it's fruitless but sometimes I just sit here and think "What the hell is wrong with us?" because sometimes it seems like we are going to be stuck in this generation's technology for forfuckingever.

#20 Posted by MAGZine (437 posts) -

Anybody who says that "developers still didn't tap everything" in the 360 is entirely out of the loop. It seems anytime I see 360 footage, I can't get over the choppiness of the game due to low framerate. The 360's hardware is aging badly.

The upshot is that the WiiU is going to be able to play everything that the 360 and PS3 are currently playing, and they'll be able to do so with a controller with controls that gamers are more or less used to. It also seems that Nintendo isn't going to be pushing the motion stuff quite as hard. These two things give gamers and developers a fair reason to look into the WiiU - it'll be able to satisfy that "hardcore" segment of gamers. Remember that the Wii U is around a year away, but a 360 or PS3 refresh is probably more than 2 years away -- remember that these guys just finished working on Kinect/Move. The Wii U definitely has an advantage by hitting mid-product cycle of both the 360 and PS3 (which are going to split each other's marketshare when they both invariably come out in the same time frame).

#21 Posted by Geno (6477 posts) -

One reason why this may be the case is because the tech industry has slowed as a whole (which in turn was caused by the global recession and recent short term problems with fabs).  
 
What was the most powerful CPU in 2008? Core i7 920, a 4C/8T processor that maximally overclocks ~3.8-4Ghz. What's the most powerful CPU in 2011? Core i7 2600K, a 4C/8T processor that maximally overclocks 4.8-5Ghz.
 
On the graphics side, we haven't seen anything new for nearly 2 years. Performance/watt and performance/dollar have barely budged since 2008. The next generation from Nvidia and AMD might not be seen until 2012. Before, the GPU industry used to advance at double to triple the speed.
 
On top of that, a lot of the cost is coming from the tablet controller and the "Nintendo Premium" (Nintendo always profits off their machine in contrast to Sony or MS, as they know that people will buy them for the opportunity to play their exclusive 1st party games like Mario and Zelda, and not strictly for hardware value).  
 
My estimate is that games on the system will probably turn out around 720p@60fps or 1080p@30fps as a standard (in contrast to the current 720p@30fps standard on PS3 and 360), with varying levels of AA depending on the game and final hardware specs of the console. 

#22 Posted by Claude (16254 posts) -

@Geno: If it's older, it should cool efficiently. Not much of a failure rate I assume. The games will work according to the port, but it seems Nintendo is looking at porting for profit. A few frames can't hurt either.

#23 Posted by niamahai (1405 posts) -

You guys think that Wii U will be the new "lowest common denominator" in development for next gen?

#24 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -
@niamahai said:

You guys think that Wii U will be the new "lowest common denominator" in development for next gen?

Is that code for industry leader? Console that women also play? Then yes.
#25 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -

@coolwhip83 said:

There is zero incentive for a PS3 or 360 owner to invest in a new console, that has the same tech inside of it.

They don't want your business. They don't need your business. Core gamers are not on XBOX 360 or PS3. Core gamers are on PC. PC gamers are people who have been called pirates and scum in the media and have had all manner of bullshit put in their way like GFWL and Uplay, have had to often deal with delayed poorer quality ports and have to pay a premium to purchase technology to play on their PCs. Yet still, regardless of all of that we PC gamers still play games happily on our PCs and we still spend more money on GPU technology than you do on the consoles you call core gaming systems. That's real core gaming. You PS3 and 360 console gamers are not core at all. You're just pandered to by companies who see you as some long term investment in cash cow farming and many of you have a HUGE sense of entitlement which actually doesn't relate at all to what's going on around you. Nintendo has the single largest majority of the market in the home and handheld iPhone/Android games are quickly eclipsing the PS3/XBOX 360 supposed core gamer market in gross value and net returns.

Core gamers...don't make me laugh.

#26 Posted by Levio (1784 posts) -

Unless that extra screen turns out to be amazingly convenient for menu options, there's no way gamers are going to pick this for their multiplatform games.

But I'm sure everyone already knew that.

#27 Posted by Geno (6477 posts) -

The main draw of the system will be the tablet controller, but I have a feeling that will flop. Nobody else but Nintendo will program for it. When a developer makes a game, typically it will be 99% the same across all platforms unless they were primarily a PC developer to start out with (4A, Dice etc). We already have the Wiimote as a very recent example; other than some instances where they replaced analogue control of a crosshair with motion control, the Wiimote was pretty much completely unused by third party developers in multiplatform games. The tablet controller will likely follow the same route; great use and heavy emphasis will come from Nintendo, but outside of that it will be akin to a paperweight or serve in only very rudimentary menu functions.  
 
On the other hand, it's still a function that's rather unique. When/if Sony and MS comes up with a similar idea, Nintendo will probably have moved on. I actually think that Nintendo is in a fairly interesting position; it's effectively sandwiched itself between generations, which means less competition and more media attention for them. By the time PS4/Xbox 720 come out around 2014 (reasonable estimate), Nintendo will probably have something new ready for 2015/2016 and the cycle continues. Due to its pedigree and business strategy, Nintendo probably stands to earn (or continue earning) considerable amounts of money for the foreseeable future. 

#28 Posted by solarisdeschain (99 posts) -
@Rolyatkcinmai said:

@Icemael said:

@coolwhip83 said:
There is zero incentive for a PS3 or 360 owner to invest in a new console, that has the same tech inside of it.
Plenty of Playstation 3 owners buy Xbox 360 systems and vice versa. Do you know why?

Exclusives. And Nintendo have by far the strongest first-party developers. Think about it: new Super Mario, new The Legend of Zelda, new Metroid, new Donkey King, new Pikmin, new Super Smash Bros., new Mario Kart, new F-Zero, new Fire Emblem... I could go on. And that's just the first-party stuff. Throw a bunch of third-party exclusives and a controller with cool tech in, and the incentive is overwhelming.

I'd argue they actually have the weakest. None of those are appealing and all but one are rehashes of super old franchises.

And your argument would be wrong. Of course I'm only going by reviews and sales and reputation and the idea that calling Metroid Prime or Super Mario Galaxy or Super Smash Bros. Brawl "rehashes" (didn't that word go out of style in, like, 2006?) is completely fucking retarded.
#29 Edited by MentalDisruption (1635 posts) -
@coolwhip83 said:

  There is zero incentive for a PS3 or 360 owner to invest in a new console, that has the same tech inside of it.

Oh there's plenty incentive. Gaming isn't just about the tech you have inside. If it was PC gaming would be the most successful hands down. Have you ever played Nintendo's first party games? Add in the supposed third party support they have going and it looks like a decent deal. The problem is that the incentive has to be greater than the fear that this console will be horribly underpowered as soon as Sony and Microsoft feel like revealing their next console. I would be surprised if anyone wanted to willingly have that underpowered wii console experience again. For some of the bigger Nintendo fans who already own a ps3/360 it might be worth it, but for anyone else I doubt it.
#30 Posted by Nardak (495 posts) -

I am just wondering what is the incentive for third party developers to develope exclusive AAA type games for Wii U with what has to be a very small userbase at the beginning.  On the other hand the xbox 360 and PS3 userbase is in the tens of millions and so the potential market is much bigger for those platforms.
 
Porting games to Wii U is a possibility but unless developers are porting every major release simultaneously to all three platforms I really dont see a reason for the core gamers to get a Wii U instead of a xbox 360 or PS3.

#31 Posted by Slaker117 (4842 posts) -
@ryanwho said:
@niamahai said:

You guys think that Wii U will be the new "lowest common denominator" in development for next gen?

Is that code for industry leader? Console that women also play? Then yes.
I believe he is referring to the "develop to the lowest acceptable tech and port up" mentality you see this generation with the 360. Games get made with the 360 as the lead platform because it is the low bar for HD machines, and then the transfer to PS3 and PC is easier because nothing has to be scaled back. It's a good thing, games will be optimized for that platform and will likely sell more. There is no need to be so defensive.
#32 Posted by Claude (16254 posts) -

I played Dawn of Discovery on the Wii and loved it. I read that the DS version wasn't bad either. A port of Anno 2070 on the Wii U would be grand.

#33 Posted by niamahai (1405 posts) -

@ryanwho said:

@niamahai said:

You guys think that Wii U will be the new "lowest common denominator" in development for next gen?

Is that code for industry leader? Console that women also play? Then yes.

erg not exactly. Develop for "lowest common denominator" = Develop for the hardware with the most users

Eg: During game development, they make it for the Wii U first then port it to the rest.

Personally I think that Sony/MS will only let Nintendo get a year head start. Give Nintendo 2 years and Nintendo might become the new go-to console.

#34 Posted by owl_of_minerva (1455 posts) -

Two things that are fucking stupid: thinking that games have to be "new" to be good, and the idea of the core gamer.
 
Anyway, the answer for the incentive to buy the Wii U are exclusives, simple as that. If you don't like their games then you have no reason to buy, but if it launches at an acceptable price point it will be the only next-gen system I adopt relatively early. Considering that Nintendo's exclusives have the least overlap between Sony/MS and the PC it might well be the only system worth owning in its own right, with the rest being more or less interchangeable. It seems ridiculous to be so concerned by a system's power when all of the next-gen consoles will be inferior to a gaming PC anyway.

#35 Posted by huntad (1940 posts) -

I don't understand how they think that a new console (now) will be a good idea when everyone already owns their Call of Duty disc readers (360, PS3). I never speak in terms of marketing, so I am specifically speaking to what would compel me to buy this thing. At the moment, I can think of nothing other than exclusives, but I am always open to suggestions.  
 
I did not like the Wii and I don't care how much it sold. If this thing does not offer anything other than new iterations of older franchises and better graphics at this point, I don't think i'd have fun with it. Still, I always give everyone a second chance. Let's see what you got Nintendo! 
 
Also, I am not saying that older franchises should just die, but wouldn't it be nice to see Nintendo create a bunch of new stuff? I can deal with a Mario title, but come on - give me something special. Give me something that makes me want to buy that console. As of now, my favorite Mario titles is still Super Mario World on the SNES. The newer ones have been good, but they still feel too familiar to top SMW. They've done so much with Mario, that maybe he needs a bit of a break. Crazy thought, eh? 

#36 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -
@Yanngc33 said:

This is sounding more and more like the dreamcast...

How? The Dreamcast was next gen, in fact the Dreamcast has a lot of games that look a hell of a lot better than PS2 titles.
 
Code Veronica on Dreamcast and Shenmue both look fucking awesome via VGA.
 
Where as the Wii U might not be next gen the Dreamcast utterly annilhilated the PS1 and N64 in terms of visuals.
#37 Posted by WoodenPlatypus (1365 posts) -

Only problem then? 
It looks fucking ridiculous.

#38 Posted by Rolyatkcinmai (2687 posts) -

@solarisdeschain said:

And your argument would be wrong. Of course I'm only going by reviews and sales and reputation and the idea that calling Metroid Prime or Super Mario Galaxy or Super Smash Bros. Brawl "rehashes" (didn't that word go out of style in, like, 2006?) is completely fucking retarded.

Just saying, for me and pretty much everyone I know, Nintendo's first party titles are not alluring at all. They need new IPs. The same old crappy brawlers and platformers are so tired and overdone that it's nauseating. That's not to say those titles don't sell. Certainly not, it's Mario. But the crowd who buys that dumb crap already bought the Wii and those titles. With upping the hardware they're trying to entice the crowd that does not suck on Mario's tit, but they're doing so without giving any incentive.

To the person who games on X360, PS3, and PC, Nintendo has no appealing exclusives at the moment. They need some, or they need to show third party games that have viable usages for that new controller before the Wii U becomes worthwhile.

#39 Posted by Icemael (6321 posts) -
@SeriouslyNow said:

They don't want your business. They don't need your business. Core gamers are not on XBOX 360 or PS3. Core gamers are on PC. PC gamers are people who have been called pirates and scum in the media and have had all manner of bullshit put in their way like GFWL and Uplay, have had to often deal with delayed poorer quality ports and have to pay a premium to purchase technology to play on their PCs. Yet still, regardless of all of that we PC gamers still play games happily on our PCs and we still spend more money on GPU technology than you do on the consoles you call core gaming systems. That's real core gaming. You PS3 and 360 console gamers are not core at all. You're just pandered to by companies who see you as some long term investment in cash cow farming and many of you have a HUGE sense of entitlement which actually doesn't relate at all to what's going on around you. Nintendo has the single largest majority of the market in the home and handheld iPhone/Android games are quickly eclipsing the PS3/XBOX 360 supposed core gamer market in gross value and net returns.

Core gamers...don't make me laugh.

If core gamers are those who spend the most money, PC gamers are most certainly not "core". If core gamers are measured by video game companies' returns, casual gamers are "core" which is idiotic for obvious reasons. If core gamers are people who will happily put up with any bullshit to own the latest graphics card, they either are morons or only care about graphics (no, not even graphics -- just graphical fidelity, which is a small aspect of a game's graphics), and what exactly is "core" about that?

@owl_of_minerva said:
Two things that are fucking stupid: thinking that games have to be "new" to be good, and the idea of the core gamer.
"Core gamer" is stupid because people use the word to mean whatever the fuck they want. I prefer "video game enthusiast". No room for misunderstanding there. Someone who just sits and plays Call of Duty or World of Warcraft all day is not a video game enthusiast, just as someone who owns a single pair of rare sneakers isn't a sneaker-head or as someone who owns a single fashionable dress isn't a fashionista.

A video game enthusiast goes where the games are. He doesn't sit with his expensive PC laughing at console gamers or vice versa -- he'll buy a gaming PC and a console or three, and then laugh at both sides for trying to convince themselves that the only platform their mommy bought for them/they could afford is the only platform for "real" gamers.
#40 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -

@Icemael said:

@SeriouslyNow said:

They don't want your business. They don't need your business. Core gamers are not on XBOX 360 or PS3. Core gamers are on PC. PC gamers are people who have been called pirates and scum in the media and have had all manner of bullshit put in their way like GFWL and Uplay, have had to often deal with delayed poorer quality ports and have to pay a premium to purchase technology to play on their PCs. Yet still, regardless of all of that we PC gamers still play games happily on our PCs and we still spend more money on GPU technology than you do on the consoles you call core gaming systems. That's real core gaming. You PS3 and 360 console gamers are not core at all. You're just pandered to by companies who see you as some long term investment in cash cow farming and many of you have a HUGE sense of entitlement which actually doesn't relate at all to what's going on around you. Nintendo has the single largest majority of the market in the home and handheld iPhone/Android games are quickly eclipsing the PS3/XBOX 360 supposed core gamer market in gross value and net returns.

Core gamers...don't make me laugh.

If core gamers are those who spend the most money, PC gamers are most certainly not "core". If core gamers are measured by video game companies' returns, casual gamers are "core" which is idiotic for obvious reasons. If core gamers are people who will happily put up with any bullshit to own the latest graphics card, they either are morons or only care about graphics (no, not even graphics -- just graphical fidelity, which is a small aspect of a game's graphics), and what exactly is "core" about that?

People who put up with a lot of hell to do anything can be rightly referred to as "core". PC gamers buy up all the GPU technology in droves with each generation, pushing forward each generation. The GPUs which consoles depend on to define generations (note the recent brouhaha over whether the Wii-U is next gen or not) come from that market, as does almost of the other stuff which makes consoles do anything remotely entertaining. That market is the core market which drives innovation, technological or otherwise. Fuck it....just think you're right. I can't be bothered.

#41 Edited by Icemael (6321 posts) -
@SeriouslyNow said:

People who put up with a lot of hell to do anything can be rightly referred to as "core".

You can call them "core graphical fidelity appreciators," then, if that makes you feel better. 

@SeriouslyNow said:

PC gamers buy up all the GPU technology in droves with each generation, pushing forward each generation. The GPUs which consoles depend on to define generations (note the recent brouhaha over whether the Wii-U is next gen or not) come from that market, as does almost of the other stuff which makes consoles do anything remotely entertaining. That market is the core market which drives innovation, technological or otherwise.

This is where you're wrong. A shit-ton of game design innovation happens on consoles (and in arcades) all the time (certainly more than on the PC, which really only pushes two genres: first-person shooting and strategy), much of which could have been done with the original PlayStation's tech, or even before that existed.

The PC market mainly pushes graphical fidelity. Game design-wise, there is very little being done on PCs now that couldn't be done on tech from a decade ago or more -- the technological evolution could stop today, and games would continue to evolve at roughly the same rate as now for many years. Eventually they'd hit a limit, but it would take a very long time. Even without the PC market, consoles could most likely evolve more than quickly enough on their own to support the rate at which game design evolves.
 
@SeriouslyNow said:

Fuck it....just think you're right. I can't be bothered.

Of course you can't.
#42 Posted by owl_of_minerva (1455 posts) -
@Rolyatkcinmai: You're still wrong. I have all those systems and the Wii has the most unique exclusives list and their first-party titles are great. You're saying more about your personal priorities than the quality of Nintendo's games. The most tired crap being released currently is the flood of multiplayer shooters, which are the current flavour of the month, not platformers or brawlers. There is nothing tired about platformers and brawlers if you want to play more platformers and brawlers. 
 
@Icemael: I agree entirely, I own every console available this generation for that reason (excluding DSi and 3DS). But in this instance I think the criticisms of the Wii and Wii U on a technological level are misguided and irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the Wii and Wii U are the least powerful systems of their generation, as PCs will usually be far more powerful than any console anyway, and good art design and game design count for more.
#43 Posted by PrivateIronTFU (3874 posts) -

I am going to buy this system for the exclusives. I don't care how powerful it is. It's Nintendo in HD. I'm on board.

#44 Posted by wolf_blitzer85 (5256 posts) -

@PrivateIronTFU said:

I am going to buy this system for the exclusives. I don't care how powerful it is. It's Nintendo in HD. I'm on board.

Word.

#45 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -

@Icemael: The PC market pushes openness. That openness spawned the mod communities, you know those non core dudes who've never produced anything remotely relevant to anything. Like, say, Portal and Left 4 Dead and stuff that's in MW2 MP and Automatic Mario and Minecraft and Terraria and all that other non core gaming stuff which has no impact at all on gaming because it's non core. Arcades leading development tech was a decade ago (and more - I used to frequent #emu, I'm sure you don't even know what that is) and these days the vast majority of arcade hardware is based directly on PC hardware (check System16 if you don't believe me). The Playstation and Saturn based on hardware from the Arcades. The Dreamcast was where that era died, but hey you know so much more right? WRONG. You ignore everything that doesn't suit your argument and then try to talk down to me when you're barely my equal let alone my better. It's why I can't be bothered talking to you.

#46 Posted by Underachiever007 (2468 posts) -

Yes, That sounds about right.

#47 Posted by solarisdeschain (99 posts) -
@owl_of_minerva said:
@Rolyatkcinmai: You're still wrong. I have all those systems and the Wii has the most unique exclusives list and their first-party titles are great. You're saying more about your personal priorities than the quality of Nintendo's games. The most tired crap being released currently is the flood of multiplayer shooters, which are the current flavour of the month, not platformers or brawlers. There is nothing tired about platformers and brawlers if you want to play more platformers and brawlers. 
   
Come on, didn't you know there's a caveat for all things Nintendo? If you like to play Mario, Metroid, and Zelda you're clearly just a baby who only plays Nintendo games and not a real gamer like him and his (definitely not 15-year-old) friends.
#48 Posted by xyzygy (9996 posts) -

I just seen an article on Kotaku that says it is in fact more powerful. The best thing to do is wait until we get official specs from Nintendo.

#49 Edited by Icemael (6321 posts) -
@SeriouslyNow said:

@Icemael: The PC market pushes openness. That openness spawned the mod communities, you know those non core dudes who've never produced anything remotely relevant to anything. Like, say, Portal and Left 4 Dead and stuff that's in MW2 MP and Automatic Mario and Minecraft and Terraria and all that other non core gaming stuff which has no impact at all on gaming because it's non core.

That openness has existed for a long, long time. So has the technology with which games like Left 4 Dead and Portal are possible. The technological evolution could've stopped a decade ago and those games would still have been perfectly possible. Just not with as nice graphics.

And I have never said that PC gaming isn't "core". All I'm opposing is your retarded notion that PC gaming is the only gaming that's "core".

@SeriouslyNow said:

Arcades leading development tech was a decade ago (and more - I used to frequent #emu, I'm sure you don't even know what that is) and these days the vast majority of arcade hardware is based directly on PC hardware (check System16 if you don't believe me). The Playstation and Saturn based on hardware from the Arcades. The Dreamcast was where that era died, but hey you know so much more right?

Read my post, for fuck's sake. Game design innovation is not the same thing as advancement of technology.

@SeriouslyNow said:

WRONG. You ignore everything that doesn't suit your argument and then try to talk down to me when you're barely my equal let alone my better. It's why I can't be bothered talking to you.

You misread, twists words and bring up irrelevant bullshit, and leave the discussion when you realize that shit doesn't fly. In thread after thread. And now you can't be bothered talking to me because you're my superior, even though you can barely read my posts without tripping over your own feet.

Right.
#50 Posted by WarlordPayne (700 posts) -
@magzine said:


Anybody who says that "developers still didn't tap everything" in the 360 is entirely out of the loop. It seems anytime I see 360 footage, I can't get over the choppiness of the game due to low framerate. The 360's hardware is aging badly.

So John Carmack is out of the loop?  Because he said exactly that in the interview that Patrick had with him from E3.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.