37 replies to this topic

[MorbidGod]

http://www.engadget....re-vs-nintendo/

I've talked about this before. I do agree that, in the world of third parties, being on POWER ISA can be a negative. However, I don't think Nintendo depends on third parties. So I don't really agree that this will move Nintendo out of the hardware business, only be a reason certain developers move away from the Nintendo platform.

What do you guys think?

[Julio93]

Why do you think Nintendo has been in the business for so long. Powerful hardware? Stupid TV gimmicks? I know there is alot of 'the death of Nintendo' threads but....its been 6 damn months, it hasn't been a year, the games aren't here but still in development. Does the Wii U need powerful hardware? Maybe, but look at the Wii, underpowered as hell but made a fantastic game called Super Mario Galaxy, up there winning multiple awards with tripple A games like Bioshock, Mass Effect. 3rd party games are competing with a underpowered 1st party exclusive. Yeah, Nintendo are sooooo doomed at this point with games still being developed.

[Soul]

Why do you think Nintendo has been in the business for so long. Powerful hardware? Stupid TV gimmicks? I know there is alot of 'the death of Nintendo' threads but....its been 6 damn months, it hasn't been a year, the games aren't here but still in development. Does the Wii U need powerful hardware? Maybe, but look at the Wii, underpowered as hell but made a fantastic game called Super Mario Galaxy, up there winning multiple awards with tripple A games like Bioshock, Mass Effect. 3rd party games are competing with a underpowered 1st party exclusive. Yeah, Nintendo are sooooo doomed at this point with games still being developed.

What does that have to do with the topic? lol

This has nothing to do with power, we are talking about architecture.

[grahamf]

There's nothing really wrong with RISC, and it does have it's benefits. Although all of the pipelines are more simplified and can do less things, you can fit more pipelines in the same space and data goes through them faster. Apple used to use PowerPC processors and they used to be way faster than Intel's offerings at the time, but the focus started turning to more efficient chips for laptops and such, and IBM just simply couldn't compete. Wth the Wii U obviously they solved the power usage problem.

 

Here's some good reading: http://www.amigahist...uk/riscisc.html

 

Nintendo can make the chip more tailored to gaming, but developers may have to work harder because dev tools that are optimized for CISC may not work as well.

Edited by grahamf, 21 May 2013 - 08:54 PM.

[Keviin]

Nintendo is not and will not be doomed, end of story.

[Socalmuscle]

Power may be better for game code, but the reality is that all computing systems that matter run on x86 or arm.

Nintendo is the odd man out.

If you are a developer looking for the biggest market, you go x86 today.

Depending on the specific power tech, a power based system has potential to outperform x86.

But the margin won't be huge and ,in a world where power is no longer very relevant in the consumer market, it's something of an chilles heel. Not due to performance, but due to coding optimization and workflow.

Sony and ms now benefit from devs who think their consoles simply make sense due to x86.

The power based wii u has competitive performance potential, but it is the "ooddball" for multiplat devs now. Basically Nintendo is "going against the industry flow."

Will be an interesting uphill battle.

[Robotic Sunshine Commander]

the architecture is fine. x86 is easier to emulate so you will be seeing ps4 and xbox emu's soon after launch. So there is no point in buying them.

[Penguin101]

Isn't PS4x86 processing?

[Goodtwin]

http://www.engadget....re-vs-nintendo/

I've talked about this before. I do agree that, in the world of third parties, being on POWER ISA can be a negative. However, I don't think Nintendo depends on third parties. So I don't really agree that this will move Nintendo out of the hardware business, only be a reason certain developers move away from the Nintendo platform.

What do you guys think?

 

 

There is some truth to this.  The Wii U will be the odd man out, but that was going to be the case regardless.  I have said in the past, the PS3 and 360 will be around for a couple more years, so the Wii U multi plats will likely be developed along side those versions, but if Wii U is sucessful enough, then developers will do the work to make it happen even after those systems are gone.  It all comes down to sales, and not just hardware sales, but sales of software.  If third parties are struggling to sell more than 500k of their most popular titles on Wii U, then once the 360 and PS3 are gone, you could see releases on Wii U become more limited.  The transition away from 360/PS3 will only happen sooner if the new systems take off like a rocket, but odds are that games like COD and Assassins Creed will take be making appearances on PS3/360 in 2015.  So Wii U has a couple of years to prove that its a platform worth supporting, ports from PS3/360 to Wii U are pretty cheap, so even with mediocre sales, its still worth while to do, but if those sales dont improve, publishers may be more selective on what they release on the platform after 2015. 

[MorbidGod]

Why do you think Nintendo has been in the business for so long. Powerful hardware? Stupid TV gimmicks? I know there is alot of 'the death of Nintendo' threads but....its been 6 damn months, it hasn't been a year, the games aren't here but still in development. Does the Wii U need powerful hardware? Maybe, but look at the Wii, underpowered as hell but made a fantastic game called Super Mario Galaxy, up there winning multiple awards with tripple A games like Bioshock, Mass Effect. 3rd party games are competing with a underpowered 1st party exclusive. Yeah, Nintendo are sooooo doomed at this point with games still being developed.

I don't think you read the article. Has nothing to do with power.

There is some truth to this. The Wii U will be the odd man out, but that was going to be the case regardless. I have said in the past, the PS3 and 360 will be around for a couple more years, so the Wii U multi plats will likely be developed along side those versions, but if Wii U is sucessful enough, then developers will do the work to make it happen even after those systems are gone. It all comes down to sales, and not just hardware sales, but sales of software. If third parties are struggling to sell more than 500k of their most popular titles on Wii U, then once the 360 and PS3 are gone, you could see releases on Wii U become more limited. The transition away from 360/PS3 will only happen sooner if the new systems take off like a rocket, but odds are that games like COD and Assassins Creed will take be making appearances on PS3/360 in 2015. So Wii U has a couple of years to prove that its a platform worth supporting, ports from PS3/360 to Wii U are pretty cheap, so even with mediocre sales, its still worth while to do, but if those sales dont improve, publishers may be more selective on what they release on the platform after 2015.

Exactly. But I don't believe Nintendo depends on them.

[DéliopT]

Different architectures never stopped games from being ported and from what we have been hearing not only it`s easy developing games on Wii U, but Nintendo is also landing a hand in the form of engine tools.

Also, seeing as many games in the coming years will still be ported to Xbox360 and PS3, there`s no reason for Wii U not getting them.

[Goodtwin]

Your right that Nintendo's success is more or less in thier own hands, and third party support is more or less icing on the cake, but there is a point where third party support becomes inadequate.  Porting cost can be minimal or significant depending on the amount of work needed to make it happen, so if the work needed to port a PS4/One game to Wii U is significant, then publishers may not see the investment being worthwhile.  Time will tell on that. 

[routerbad]

Everyone needs to remember that PowerISA is what has been the primary focus for game developers worldwide for the last seven years.  x86 has been the backseat man.  This will make x86 more popular but it doesn't diminish the Wii U prospects at all because all game developers are still tooled for PowerISA, and updating the dev environment to handle the newer instruction set isn't a huge investment.

[MorbidGod]

Your right that Nintendo's success is more or less in thier own hands, and third party support is more or less icing on the cake, but there is a point where third party support becomes inadequate. Porting cost can be minimal or significant depending on the amount of work needed to make it happen, so if the work needed to port a PS4/One game to Wii U is significant, then publishers may not see the investment being worthwhile. Time will tell on that.

Which we are seeing this with EA. Bit, EA is hurting for money.

I believe smaller teams it might affect, but Ubisoft and Activision has the ability to easily make their games available to the Wii U.

[itogi]

I'm I the only one that is sick and tried of seeing a Nintendo's doom topic?

[MorbidGod]

I'm I the only one that is sick and tried of seeing a Nintendo's doom topic?

THIS ISN'T really a doom and gloom thread. Look at what I said. Have been saying. In this thread. Nintendo will be just fine.

I merely posted this article and want your opinion on it. That's all.

[tboss]

it raises porting costs, so can and will cost some multyplats, but it also helps the wiiU from not being emulation. 

[itogi]

THIS ISN'T really a doom and gloom thread. Look at what I said. Have been saying. In this thread. Nintendo will be just fine.

I merely posted this article and want your opinion on it. That's all.

 

Okay.

[PS3WIIIUfan]

i think people should not be worried about the wii u, i think xbox fans should be worried about the xbox one lol what a pile of crap

[AndyG]

Going a little off topic but i still don't see how 8GB of RAM is really going to make a major difference in the PS4 tech even though the tech demos were running on 3-4GB. People seem to be inclined to believe that more RAM means better Graphics, more RAM might help increase performance, frame rate, objects on screen and animation but it shouldn't make to much of a difference on screen. Im no tech expert and I can see the extra RAM helping improve the overall graphics, but i doubt it will be as much as people will think it will be.

If im wrong please correct me on this.