Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Originally Posted by antlp89 From what I've heard, isn't the Wii U barely stronger than a PS3/360 processor wise?

I've heard it is twice as powerful as a 360, but what does that really mean?

Originally Posted by TheLongshot I've heard it is twice as powerful as a 360, but what does that really mean?

I'm all for it, but this IS Nintendo we're talking about. Does anyone honestly believe that they will be jumping from, essentially 2001 tech to doubling the 360? Same with going from the most rudimentary online to a robust online system ready at launch?

Since they SNES they have specialized in doing the bare minimum to compete and still be profitable. I don't see why that would change all of a sudden.

I thought 360 was 2003 tech, not 2001.

Originally Posted by Corvin I'm all for it, but this IS Nintendo we're talking about. Does anyone honestly believe that they will be jumping from, essentially 2001 tech to doubling the 360? Same with going from the most rudimentary online to a robust online system ready at launch? Since they SNES they have specialized in doing the bare minimum to compete and still be profitable. I don't see why that would change all of a sudden.

Except that the bare minimum now might very well be twice as fast than the current tech of the 360.

Note that in the article I read that, developers were still a little disappointed in that, expecting more.

Originally Posted by KingBroly I thought 360 was 2003 tech, not 2001.

I meant jumping from essentially Gamecube to twice as powerful as a 360. I just don't see it happening, but I'm more than willing to be impressed.

Originally Posted by Corvin I meant jumping from essentially Gamecube to twice as powerful as a 360. I just don't see it happening, but I'm more than willing to be impressed.

That's a good point... I mean, maybe the GPU or CPU won't be as far behind as the PS4/Xbox3's (it will probably be like Dreamcast versus PS2 difference) but it seems like Nintendo is always behind in some sense. The Wii U is already confirmed to use proprietary optical media (so there's likely going to be no BD or DVD playback) and I can't see them having a very robust online network.

A friend of mine made a point that would substantially increase my desire for a Wii U: if they let you use the controller as a tablet type device. It's a really good idea... to be able to use the controller as stand alone tablet as an e-reader or to browse the net. But knowing Nintendo, it's not gonna happen. I mean, they've ready confirm that it's a single-touch touchpad in an age where everything is multi-touch. Then again, who knows? Maybe those hackers can get Android running on it.

Originally Posted by Vinny The Wii U is already confirmed to use proprietary optical media (so there's likely going to be no BD or DVD playback) and I can't see them having a very robust online network.

No Blu-ray? Nintendo does it again...

Why though? Seriously ridiculous. Hopefully they backtrack.

It's proprietary Blu-Ray, so it won't play BR movies, but it is Blu-Ray...technically. Basically it saves them a large fee per console (I think it's $9 or so).

As for Console Power, I don't see it being far behind 720, but...that Sony man. Those people are crazy. I halfway expect 8gb of RAM and, a 2 TB HDD and a graphics card from the year the PS4 is released.

Originally Posted by KingBroly It's proprietary Blu-Ray, so it won't play BR movies, but it is Blu-Ray...technically. Basically it saves them a large fee per console (I think it's $9 or so). As for Console Power, I don't see it being far behind 720, but...that Sony man. Those people are crazy. I halfway expect 8gb of RAM and, a 2 TB HDD and a graphics card from the year the PS4 is released.

I wonder what the price is going to be for the Wii U. If it under $300 then I can see it do really good.

Are you being serious about the PS4? Do you think that its going be last to join the next generation again?

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that Sony is the 'tech first' company. They'll always push higher end tech over cost-effective measures. So I'm saying they might go crazy again and go for another high end piece of tech that probably doesn't do them any favors.

And yes, I do think it's going to be the last to join "next gen" at this rate, since we're hearing tons of things about the next Xbox and not the next Playstation at this point in time.

As for Wii speculation, I'm going to guess that a firmware update happens later this year that will allow VC/WW transfers to Wii U; similar to what a DSi firmware update last year provided. This is not a guess, it's going to happen.

I'm not so sure about Sony 'going for it' this time. After the PS3 pricing disaster, they seem to have learned the price lesson with the Vita. Problem is, in Japan anyway, the 'big tech' of the Vita isn't setting the world on fire. They've gone big tech with big price, and there was a backlash. They've gone big tech with a low price, and Japan roundly went "yeah, no". Depending on how the rest of the world responds to the Vita, I wouldn't be shocked if Sony doesn't quite swing for the fences with the PS4. Plus, Sony as a company hasn't been doing wonderfully, so they may not be in a position to go with the hubris of the PS3 launch again. They need an out of the gate success. That's just my take on it, though.

Now, for the person who said Nintendo is always behind... am I wrong in remembering that the GameCube was behind the Xbox but ahead of the PS2 in terms of power last gen?

Originally Posted by 007 Now, for the person who said Nintendo is always behind... am I wrong in remembering that the GameCube was behind the Xbox but ahead of the PS2 in terms of power last gen?

That's correct. Xbox was the most powerful followed by Gamecube then PS2. It's not hard to see why though, the PS2 had a year head start, and MS & Nintendo could put in better tech. (same for this gen, 360 was first, so the PS3 had a year to put in some more impressive hardware).

Even if you consider that not doing the bare-minimum to compete(middle of the pack), it was hampered by low capacity proprietary discs.

Originally Posted by 007 I'm not so sure about Sony 'going for it' this time. After the PS3 pricing disaster, they seem to have learned the price lesson with the Vita. Problem is, in Japan anyway, the 'big tech' of the Vita isn't setting the world on fire. They've gone big tech with big price, and there was a backlash. They've gone big tech with a low price, and Japan roundly went "yeah, no". Depending on how the rest of the world responds to the Vita, I wouldn't be shocked if Sony doesn't quite swing for the fences with the PS4. Plus, Sony as a company hasn't been doing wonderfully, so they may not be in a position to go with the hubris of the PS3 launch again. They need an out of the gate success. That's just my take on it, though.

Personally, I see Sony being the one company that might sit on this generation for a while. The PS3 is finally profitable and I see little out there that would require a PS4 from Sony. Things might change once Microsoft puts out something, but until then I don't see it.

Originally Posted by 007 I'm not so sure about Sony 'going for it' this time. After the PS3 pricing disaster, they seem to have learned the price lesson with the Vita. Problem is, in Japan anyway, the 'big tech' of the Vita isn't setting the world on fire. They've gone big tech with big price, and there was a backlash. They've gone big tech with a low price, and Japan roundly went "yeah, no". Depending on how the rest of the world responds to the Vita, I wouldn't be shocked if Sony doesn't quite swing for the fences with the PS4. Plus, Sony as a company hasn't been doing wonderfully, so they may not be in a position to go with the hubris of the PS3 launch again. They need an out of the gate success. That's just my take on it, though. Now, for the person who said Nintendo is always behind... am I wrong in remembering that the GameCube was behind the Xbox but ahead of the PS2 in terms of power last gen?

I know the Xbox was more powerful than the Cube last generation, but I don't think it was that far behind. I know the gap between the Xbox/Cube and PS2 power-wise was somewhat substantial. The only reason why graphics were comparable between all 3 was because the PS2 was the lead platform for almost every game released.

If monster hunter doesn't get on the Vita, its probably screwed since that is what most people bought the PSP for, playing Monster hunter, at least in Japan. Or another huge franchise that has the power to sell like Monster hunter. Which is why the PSP has such success there. For now its either buy the system with monster hunter or buy the system without it, the PSP has monster hunter so they are buying that.

Monster hunter is on the 3DS now in Japan, combined with a couple mario games and plenty more stuff on the way leads to huge sales because the 3DS has the games people want to play. Heck in the US the 3DS can sell on the release of 2 mario games alone, just shows how powerful the mario brand is. Even if people buy the system for just the 2 mario games right now they are buying it and the price is low enough to justify buying it for the 2 games. When they get a Pokemon RPG on this sales will be through the roof no doubt in both Japan and the US. Though I still see way more kids here with apple devices and hardly any 3DS's, though I think in Japan that might be different as they don't have a ton of free Wifi hotspots for the iPod touch like the USA does. I don't think I have seen anyone with a 3DS in public yet here, and that is pretty sad. I don't know if the saturation of apple devices in Japan has reached US levels. I also think the high concentration of apple devices here might have to do with the fact that there is an apple store in my area because someone must be playing the 3DS in the USA or it wouldn't sell that much.

Originally Posted by Corvin Even if you consider that not doing the bare-minimum to compete(middle of the pack), it was hampered by low capacity proprietary discs.

Not true. By the time of RE4's release, it was generally accepted that for what games could do at that time, the GCN could keep pace with the Xbox. Disc capacity didn't become an "item" until Sony tried to convince everyone that unless you had 25 GB to play with thanks to blu-ray, every game release would involve 4+ discs.

Originally Posted by Corvin It's not hard to see why though, the PS2 had a year head start, and MS & Nintendo could put in better tech.

This comparison of the "Big 3" is apples to oranges not only in the timing, but in the context. The PS2 was a direct response to the DC, who tried to scoop to gain early marketshare. That strategy worked a lot better for MS with the 360 than it did for Sega, though the red-ring horror stories are evidence that it wasn't a battle that was easily won.

I still think the hardware concerns are moot until we have a handle on what the WII U does. Broly has alluded to having his/her finger on the pulse of its functionality, but based on the meager stories/rumors and the demos Nintendo released, I'm not seeing a lot of additional functionality there over a Wii. Especially now that a Vita/PS3 can apparently replicate what the classic-controller-had-a-baby-with-an-ipad thing can do.

Originally Posted by dothog I still think the hardware concerns are moot until we have a handle on what the WII U does. Broly has alluded to having his/her finger on the pulse of its functionality, but based on the meager stories/rumors and the demos Nintendo released, I'm not seeing a lot of additional functionality there over a Wii. Especially now that a Vita/PS3 can apparently replicate what the classic-controller-had-a-baby-with-an-ipad thing can do.

I disagree in that the Wii U Tablet is packed in, making a platform that is "stable" enough for developers to target, whereas the PS3/Vita paring (while neat), is basically a retread of the GCN/GBA and Wii/DS pairing that currently exists. The games that exist for the paired console/handheld deal work well enough, but you can probably count on one hand the games made for all of those iterations*.

So conceptually they are the same, but implementation matters.

*It's possible the PS3/Vita combination may get more penetration than the others due to the PSN connection that shares certain games, but I wouldnt wager too much on that option... Which is a shame because it is surprisingly forward and friendly of Sony.

The problem with the PS3/Vita functionality is that not all games going forward, whether they come out on everything, Vita included, or not, is that Developers have to allocate memory in order to use that functionality. With Wii U, they are, at least for a while, going to have an overhead over PS3 in order to do so.

It doesn't take much to be "creative" with that tablet, which I assume will lead developers to say 'we won't work on Wii U because we can't think of what to do with that screen.' Just put the menu there for quick and easy access. It's simple, effective and probably takes little effort. It's not really thinking outside the box, either.

Originally Posted by KingBroly It doesn't take much to be "creative" with that tablet, which I assume will lead developers to say 'we won't work on Wii U because we can't think of what to do with that screen.' Just put the menu there for quick and easy access. It's simple, effective and probably takes little effort. It's not really thinking outside the box, either.

That's my concern, and that's why I've questioned the functionality. I don't doubt the potential, but in the little bit I've seen, it seems like that pad is effectively what the DS's second screen was for the first 9-12 months of the DS's life. I can't imagine the WII U being able do as the DS did and hang around long enough for developers to realize its potential.

No matter what the WII U's internals are, if the pad is Nintendo's only hook, I just don't see it grabbing interest. The DS's second screen was odd enough to garner interest, the Wii's motion control and sports demo definitely works, and as lame as the use of the trendy, "3D" buzzword was, it was good for initial 3DS sales. But an unwieldy controller/pad? They're going to have to have a hell of an E3.

Here some numbers about the power of the consoles.
Last gen power in Flops(floating point operations per second)
ps2 about 6 billion(almost all CPU)
Gamecube about 11 billion(over 90% CPU)
Xbox about 20 billion (I believe less than half was CPU)
This gen
Wii CPU- 60 billion GPU- 1-2 billion total about 60 billion
360 CPU-120 billion GPU about 200 billion total about 300 billion
PS3 CPU- 200 billion GPU about 200 billion total about 400 billion
Next gen
Wii U CPU 180 billion GPU over a trillion(both based on reports of the hard ware)
ps4 and 720 - I've heard nothing other than the rumors that they will be 10 times as powerful(take these with a grain of salt as they both claimed their current systems would be about 3-5 times as powerful as they actually are)

So the Wii U's total power looks to be 3-5 times that of a current consoles. If the other system live up to their PR hype then they will be 2-3 time more powerfull than the Wii U, which may not seem good but it was what the PS2 was and it much better that the current gen where the Wii has 20-15% of the power of the other consoles.

Also FLOPS is a measure of potential power no system will use all of it, efficiency depends on the architecture of the system and how well the game is programed.(It is/was harder to program for the PS3 so even though it had more power it was hard to take advantage of it, hence why many game looked just as good or even better on the 360)