ok thats not for wifi!

Yes it was.  I remember it pretty well, I tested my wifi connection after the update, because I only had issues over wifi and not ethernet.

Back to Wii u problems!

lol, ok.  I haven't noticed many problems, but if people are having wifi issues, Nintendo will eventually address it.  Sony had to.  In fact, things like media playback, DLNA support, trophies, chat, etc were all added to PS3 after launch.  Way after launch in some cases.  I'm hopeful Nintendo eventually does the same.  They are in a similar situation the PS3 was, Sony was just setting up a brand new network infrastructure and it took time to roll out all of the features they wanted to include in the system.

thats not true! where u get this info brutha!

I had ps3 from day one never a patch for wifi lol

Version 1.93 PS3 system software update to improve network connection stability.

yeah , right. and when i put the console next to the router, works excellent. i'll have to glue the router to the wiiu.

don't think so, ps3 is not my favorite console, but something great about it, it's that the wifi connection works perfectly.

Yeah it doesn't need to be that close, just reasonable.

 

The PS3 would have been better off not coming with a wifi connection in the first place, it was absolutely terrible at launch and wasn't fixed until much later.  It was actually in their patch notes at one point, to fix wifi performance.

Mine took over an hour just to do a game update, yet an hour or so before my ps3 did one and took like 5 mins.

That's a very subjective measure, as not all updates are created equal.  I will say that there is something wrong with the way nintendo is doing downloads, installs, and updates.  Why do I need to download and install something?  Why wouldn't it be packaged and placed exactly where it needs to go from the start?

Originally, I was pointing out you were wrong when you said that Nintendo was selling the Wii U for profit. Then you said that the 360 put Microsoft in a hole for 4 years, and that was also wrong.

 

So I guess I'm trying to prove YOU wrong and have done so successfully.

 

I know Microsoft is lacking on 1st party support... but you know what? I don't care. I don't care who develops the game, as long as it's good. I can look back on this past gaming generation and think of about 10 of my favorites. I'd say 8/10 were Multi-Platform releases. The good thing is Microsoft, for example, can have great 1st party and 3rd party games. And the kicker is the 3rd party titles always have always ran better on the 360 than PS3.

 

And the reason Microsoft can acquire all those timed exclusives and marketplace games is because of the yearly subscription. So those with a PS3 who cry that they don't get DLC first... boo hoo... us 360 players PAY for that privilege.

Awesome, then you probably game on PC then, right?

 

360 owners don't pay Microsoft for a 3rd party publisher to release DLC sooner.  LIVE has nothing to do with that.  Microsoft relies primarily on 3rd party games, and therefore is the most aggressive at attracting those third parties to make deals.  Something I think Sony is trying to change.

I mainly game on PC, but sometimes 360 when I want to play on the couch.

 

How do you know that my LIVE subscription doesn't help pay developers to release timed DLC content? Wouldn't it make sense that the company who charges for online play will get timed exclusives first?

 

I think it has a lot to do with it

You pay for Microsoft to maintain their servers for multiplayer and for the Microsoft services included in LIVE.  The way that they were able to include integrated matchmaking for every game, regardless of the publisher, was thanks to those of us that paid for LIVE.  I've been paying for 10 years now, too.

This is a big deal i think, im expecing PS4 and XBOX to launch around £400, thats £50 more than i paid for my WII U, would i, and all of us paid that for the extra power meaning we get all the big games, hell yeah.
People talk about poor console manufacturers making a loss on each console but remember this, new mario bros u was hardly any different from that 2d one they launched on wii, so they take the old one, re jig the levels, up the graphics to hd and add a few gamepad features and sell nearly a copy with every console, more than making up for any loss on hardware. Theres no way they used a whole dev team for that game, so costs were low, but was the game cost any lower?

It won't be, unless they plan on taking a huge loss.  It isn't about power, at all.  The parts are expensive, GDDR5 is extremely expensive.  PS4 will be more expensive than both the others, XBOX is rumored to have a subscription model to subsidize the cost, but then you are paying $20/month for XBL.

Very interesting. You would think Sony, seeing their losses piling up left and right, would change their approach and put some control on how spending is handled in their divisions. This would explain why PS3, specifically, was such a money disaster for them. Basically, they let Ken Kutaragi go balls-to-the-wall without any concern or care for costs. The result? All of PS2's massive profits get wiped out. Looking back on it, was forcing Ken out of the division the real answer to their problem with PS3? I'm not so sure. Their whole corporate structure is what's hurting them it seems.

They didn't let him, he withheld information from them.  He wanted to create the "Rolls-Royce" of consoles, and it ended up being a very powerful console with no value to a typical gaming consumer.

 

Nintendo is attacking from the other point of view, a console that they feel is "good enough" and a controller that while it holds the potential to be transformative, will end up being an overly complex controller unless they can entice 3rd party developers with games that are typically limited to the PC to make the jump based on what the controller offers.

 

This is the first time Nintendo has ever eased their third party development restrictions, which is a bold move on their part, and an admission that they do need third parties on board to have a successful product.  They still need more games, more very compelling games, not just announcements but releases (honestly WTF is up with Pikmin?) to start to drive sales in the right direction.  They won't be able to pull marketshare from Sony or Microsoft unless they get third party developers on board, with the games that western consumers flock to, to make games for the platform, with at least visual parity on those versions.  They can't expect the controller to sell the console, games have to do that, and they have been showing that they are willing to make their system a better place for third parties, though some will still refrain at first because of poor sales on third party games since N64.

 

I want them to compete very badly, just as much as I would love Sony to compete, but I believe that Sony would have been better served by offering a little less on the spec sheet so they could make a profit on the console from the outset, I would have been sold if they hadn't been pushing their services so hard.  I'm a gamer, I want to buy a machine that I will play games on, not circle jerk with internet acquaintances or let people tell me what to do.  I really hope the price point it right, because I want a PS4 very badly as well, but if it is anywhere from 450+ I will have to take a pass until the price comes down.  I want them to do well in the marketplace, but I question their strategy here simply because they don't have the money to lose.  

 

Nintendo has the money to take a gamble this gen and reassess the next, something Sony had the opportunity to do between PS2-PS3.  They bet wrong, and it cost them dearly.  I'd have fired the entire hardware engineering team for what happened.  I'm going to bet on Wii U this gen only because of my preferences and opinions, but I'd love to be compelled to buy a PS4 at launch, however unlikely. 

 

EDIT:  I'm sorry for some of the runon there, and the overuse of comma(commi?)

Wow. That's pretty messed up. I had no idea. Sorry, but if I were in a leadership role, I would absolutely demand to know the costs going into my products. Good Lord... no wonder they're in such bad shape. Have they always operated like this?

They've always treated their engineers like Rockstars, but Microsoft treats their programmers the same way, Google is similar.  The difference is that Sony doesn't have a solid money maker to fall back on, everything they do is losing them money.  Microsoft has the Windows division, most notably Windows Server, which makes them lots of money in enterprise agreements that reach into the tens of millions.

 

Google has their advertising, which gives them a lot of flexibility to try their hand at several different markets.

 

Sony doesn't have anything that makes them money, and they are drowning.

Off-the-shelf parts, no heavy R&D costs which hurt them with the Cell processor, and Blu-ray drives are much cheaper than they were when PS3 launched. Having said that, they COULD still sell at a loss, but I don't think it will be anywhere near as bad as it was with PS3. We'll have to wait and see.

Even still, They carry a .8133 debt ratio, meaning around 81 cents of the every dollar the company has in total assets would cover their debts.  All of their divisions are bleeding money, their content divisions don't talk to their engineering divisions.  The PS4, even with off the shelf parts, will cost probably ~600 USD for manufacturing per console, if they sell it for profit, they will get abysmal sales and uptake, no amount of hype can cover that.  If they sell it for a loss, they will sell better, but not gangbusters, and will cause them even more losses.

 

Sony's debt is currently carries junk status, and they are a very bad bet on the market.  They won't be able to continue if they don't pull a magic trick out.  I'm not sure where they are going, but I doubt they will be able to continue in this race.  Nintendo is always the company people like to label as "stuck in the past" and "doomed to failure" but Nintendo is still in great financial shape, their debt ratio is low, they have plenty of operating assets (money in the bank) and are able to focus on what is important to them, great games.

 

Sony is still carrying a mindset that worked in the 90s for them, when world economies were in great shape, people had plenty of disposable income, and could afford the commonly overpriced Sony products.  Sony is basically Apple stretched too thin.  When Apple moved into the mobile device business, it was a calculated risk, based on new technologies and high quality software that worked seamlessly with their other platforms.  They haven't been moving into different industries since then, they have only been expanding their role within the mobile devices market.  Sony has divisions that reach into both electronics and content, and none of it has been giving any solid returns for a very long time.

The forums first troll posted, that's what.

ahhh

nin_stream, no, stop it.

 

You can't fake it when you can't forum, so stop it.

What on earth are you talking about?

Speed was measured with Speedtest.net using the Wii U browser. For users who spend most of the time running games, the WiFI speed is not a problem. Even on-line games run o.k. because the ping speed is good. But if you try to stream full HD videos fron Netflix or You Tube it can cause problems.

If you Google "Wii U slow WIFI" there is a lot of info. I have a lot of experience in setting up networks, and after trying all of the suggested fixes posted on the net, I'm convinced that the speed limitation is caused by the Wii U.

It could be caused if there is other utilization on the line while you are running speedtest. The hardware cannot limit the bandwidth, the only bandwidth it really knows about is the connection between it and the wireless gateway. If the browser is limited with regard to the number of connections it can open simultaneously you will see a difference there as well. Network interfaces themselves are very limited in the amount of bandwidth throttling they can do without specific software to limit incoming connections, or a route processor. I wonder what you would see if you ran the same test on a 360 browser or PS3 browser, as both of those are constantly talking with Microsoft and Sony servers, respectively.

Also, the youtube issue is with the app, and Youtube on the browser works flawlessly. I haven't had any issues with Netflix and have been able to stream HD media through that application.

Also, speedtest is not a reliable measurement of the local wireless bandwidth. If you log into your gateway you can see at what speed the Wii U is connected. I recommend setting it to static IP, and setting up any port forwarding rules that are suggested by Nintendo. Also, try changing the wireless channel to cut down on interference locally.

It's super slow for me too. It literally took me 3 hours to download Runner 2 last night. That game is less than a gig. Defenders, what is your magic trick? My 360 downloads 10 times faster.

I'm downloading it now, says 10 minutes.

I like the Wii U a lot but if it is going to be a success they need to fix two basic problems.

1) The OS is painfully slow when switching menus and modes.

2) The WIFI is also slow. I have five other devices that connect at 20 Mbs and the Wii U runs at 6.8 Mbs max. I have tried all of the fixes posted on the net with no success. I tried hard wiring with a USB/network adapter and it actually ran a little slower.

Has anyone heard anythng further about an OS upgrade to fix these problems?

Where are you going to see bandwidth utilization on the Wii U wireless adapter? Or are you referring to the bandwidth past the router? If that is the case you can create port forwarding rules, turn on UPnP, and set up QoS on your gateway to ensure better bandwidth allocation to the Wii U. Also, if you are looking at bandwidth utilization during a patch or game download, it probably has something to do with your distance from the ISP hub, and the connection with the Nintendo servers, which really can't be helped too much. If you are looking at bandwidth utilization while idle or simple web browsing, it would have no reason to ramp up utilization. Your connection to the wireless gateway should be 54Mbps+ depending on whether or not it is an N device.

I haven't tried speedtest on the Wii U yet because I have been rather pleased with the network speeds thus far and didn't see a need, but I might try it just to find out. It isn't like Nintendo is forcing a proxy connection on the device, but it is constantly connecting to MiiVerse. If the bandwidth between the Wii U and a remote server is being limited, I doubt very much it is anything other than the way your network is set up.

NONE OF THEM HAVE DICKS OR VAJJ'S

Ohhh the androgyny!!

FreddieW did the Mario version.

speedtest.not in wii u's browser? I thought that was flash based, when did they start html5 compatability?

I just downloaded runner 2, i started the download, took a poo and it was done.

Took longer to install than download... Which is another problem, WHAT IS UP WITH THESE INSTALL TIMES?

Agreed, installing it now 20 minutes, jeezy

Lol wtf?! This makes no sense to me. I believe you but just don't understand. I could download the same game in 10 minutes on my 360. I'd blame WiiU, but there's clearly evidence that proves otherwise. Whatever, if I want a game I'll download before I leave for work I guess.

Right, the download went just fine, the install took a good while, 30 min total, and the install issue is all Wii U, they can't fix that fast enough. On another note, Runner 2 is fanstastic, just got through the first world. All on just right, all bullseyes.

Then how do you explain that my MacBook Air, iPad, iPhone, 3DS, Wii and Vita all download at acceptable speeds over wi-fi and the kind of speeds they should be yet my Wii U doesn't. If it was my router, Internet connection or I.P. related it would affect them all. I'm also not the only one who experiences slow downloads on the Wii U when everything else is just fine. Its certainly not a bandwidth issue as it also happens when only the Wii U is downloading. In fact I very rarely have multiple devices downloading that the same time.

If you are referring to downloading software and updates from the Nintendo Network, they probably don't have their backend network scaled up to where it needs to be.  Everything else on the Wii U that uses the network connection runs without issue in my experience.

 

Considering it's a new service that they've built from the ground up starting from scratch not more than a year ago, it will take them time to get the kind of infrastructure required to support millions of users simultaneously up and running.  That isn't necessarily Nintendo's fault, they contracted this work out, but they need to be there to ensure timelines are met and that the network is scaled properly.  I design enterprise networks for a living, and it only takes one tiny issue on one piece of hardware to bring a network to a crawl.  

 

I honestly can't explain what the problem is on your personal network, but unless broadcom provided faulty hardware to Nintendo or they provided poorly written drivers, I seriously doubt an issue with the console itself.

the wifi is just awfull, my ps3 , iphone 4 , ipad 3 and my notebook work excellent with my wifi connection, except for my wiiu. i always have to reconfigure my wiiu wifi connection. so disappointed.

Again there isn't anything wrong with the wifi.  Check for interference and make sure it is set to static IP, and set on a specific wireless channel. 

the mbps does not effect ur ping and online game, even if u got a 33.600bps modem, u can play smoothly... Wii U is known for its a problematic wifi, I dont know why nintendo is not fixing that...   mbps effect only the dlc

I'm afraid it doesn't work like that anymore.  There is much more data than you realize being sent back and forth with the selected host than just "ping" which is simply a measure of latency between two clients.  Bandwidth affects everything, and I see nothing that indicates Wii U having "problematic wifi".  The wireless adapter works as advertised.  I and others get acceptable speeds using the built in wifi, without any issues.  If it was a software problem, it would be affecting everyone, and Broadcom is the largest manufacturer of wireless transceivers in the world so even suggesting a hardware issue is pretty much out of the question.

 

It's either too far away from the gateway, obstructed, or otherwise deprecated. 

BTW speedtest.net does not work with the built in browser on the Wii U.  Try again.

I do believe that was the whole intention of my post. The only way to make change is if more people let themselves be heard. But the average person doesn't care. Until it affects them directly, that is. It's great to be optimistic about change, but it's also a good trait to be realistic.

 

Anyway, I agree with everything else you said. I just don't like how dtrex made it seem like he was entitled to something from a company.

Agreed.  We aren't entitled to any product or service, we either accept the price and terms that the provider sets or we take our money elsewhere, simple as that.  Well, it is much more complicated than that but that's a simplistic yet mostly accurate way of looking at it.

Well tell me this.. Do you know the age of the girl? Or the OP? How do we know she doesn't have life experence? We don't know so what my opinion is based on is what info was provided. Hell I dated a stripper when I was 26 her mentailty was of a 14 year old but she had a lot of life experience. We haven't been getting details funny thing is op seeks truth in what I post but community members want to insult a post they don't agree with? Lmao @ this community if this is how you guys treat other members

So we don't know. Based on what was given that is my opinion. Nice guys finish last with their special set of rules.

Sounds like at 26 you still had a lot of growing up to do.  I can infer based on the information given that all parties are fairly young, unless OP got his license revoked for some reason.  Lets be honest here, you were quite obviously trolling, which implies to STILL have some growing up to do.  The community isn't responsible for putting this person's personal business on the forum, OP is.  That really has nothing to do with why anyone reacted the way they did to your posts.  Your assessment was wrong, plain and simple.  I'm sorry but anyone with half a brain cell isn't going to make life choices based on console preferences.  Perhaps you enjoy going after the low hanging fruit, I'm sure it's easier when you feel intellectually superior to someone.

Oh and nice guys don't finish last with women who are worth a damn.  Guys who are indecisive, weak, unable to express their needs do.  There is a big difference between nice and completely submissive.  Completely submissive guys creep girls the hell out, which is why they always end up friendzoned.