routerbad

Nintendo did not purposely allow devs to only a certain amount of power.

 

The developers were unfamiliar with the new architecture for one.  That is a huge hurdle by itself.  Developers familiar with the old PPC architectures of 360 and PS3 are in a whole new world with Power 7 derived fundamentals.

 

Second, the tons of custom hardware in the MCM, especially the GPU, left developers unable to tap into the vast resources that the Wii U affords in terms of processing power.  Nintendo was not able to provide the "keys" to that treasure room until recently.

 

Third, without a thorough understanding of how to make use of the ram setup, that could have posed an issue there for any demanding games.  And that may be why we have seen zero demanding games yet.

 

Note, both the PS4 and One have similar design fundamentals to the Wii U.  It's the new game and everyone is playing it.

 

The difference is that Sony and MS have had more resources to pour into their development and have had tools ready earlier in development.

 

Nintendo didn't withold power from developers, it simply wasn't done crafting the "key" to the treasure room.

 

There is power awaiting developers now.

 

After seeing the size of the One console considering it's paltry maximum power draw (not much more than Wii U), it amazes me all the more how talented the engineers at Nintendo are to get all that power into such a tiny setup.

That fifa demo might have better animations and a bump in textures, but it didn't impress me..
3Dude the gpu has 768 operations per cycle, how does that compare to the wii u? Or we don't know what the wii u does? Also the 40nm chip rumor seems to be false.

Eh, thats a pretty old rumour man, and one that looks to be seriously sq
uashed if not aalready and long ago. In fact... ms didnt really say much of anything about specs... It was eerily..... Nintendo like of them.

We know it has a soc with an 8 core jaguar cpu, 8Gb ddr3, 25Mb embedded ram on gpu (color me surprised, strike up one point for wii u) and 3 freaking operating systems (wtf really?).... And a power draw of less than 100 watts. barely more than 360/ps3 slim.... And thats it.

Remember that one time where 200 people were capable of swaying a giant company's opinion?

 

Haha, neither did I.

ITT: Petitionception.

We've got to go derper.

 

Leave them make their petitions, I'll probably buy both bayonetta and sonic worlds if they're not terrible.

I dont dissagree with everything they said, but for how negative the article was, you would think that Nintendo was a failing company.  Nintendo does drag its feet in various areas, but at the end of the day people buy consoles to play games on, and if there are great games that you can only find on Nintendo consoles, then everything else is really just a bonus. 

Surprised to see this erroneous thread resurrected.

Basically it starts off with the premise that a flavor of the Unity engine (also employed by PS4) is limited to Direct x 10 features or equivalent. For that particular flavor of Unity, that is true.

What is not true is that the "lite" version of the engine ("want DX11? Pay up" motivator) is indicative of hardware limitations regarding the platforms it runs on: PS4 and Wii U (probably new xbox as well).

The wii U already does tesselation and has already shown off DX 11 equivalent effects. The Wii U in most if not all cases won't be using the Direct X 11 API and neither will ps4  but both will be using a compatible shader version and a combination of Open GL and custom APIs which do the same things as DX11.

The end.

In the end, whether purposeful or in ignorance, the OP erroneously related features of a stripped down game engine version to the hardware capabilities of the platforms it runs on: ps4 and wii u.

Great seeing all these Posts. Some basic, some in depth.
As Nintendo fans, we appreciate what Nintendo try and do.
This is why I asked WHY DID U BUY A WII U.
Keep the posts coming.

I hope it's not starfox

Fight me bro. IT'S ON.

Fight me bro. IT'S ON.

 

It's only under powered if it doesn't do what it's meant to do.  And I'd pretty much say it is doing fine.

 

It was meant to be a next gen console heralding a new era of gaming.

 

It is doing that.  But only slightly so far. the Wii U GamePad is an obvious change.  

 

But the graphics of the Wii U are also one of the things that was heavily focused on.  Right now, the only real evidence we see on that front is NFS, which blows away the competing console versions of the game.  And that is not really a concerted effort to get the most out of Wii U.  It is basically the same game as the other consoles with higher grade PC assets used and some extras tacked on. The Wii U can do much better.  At launch, Nintendo was caught trying to do too much too fast with too little time, so they created some games that could simply fill the void (less costly development costs while buying time for the more demanding game productions) while also having third parties struggle with immature tools and outdated development creation kits.  In short, the Wii U launch was a bit of a nightmare for anyone making Wii U games.  but by Q3 of this year, we should be seeing games that reveal the true, next gen nature of the Wii U. These games should also be shown in the E3 and Pre E3 Nintendo Direct internet broadcasts. 

 

As far as what the Wii U was "meant" to do, we will have a much better discussion on this in Q3.  Because NSMBU, Wonderful 101, etc. simply don't do the job.  Fun games in their own right, but not what the Wii U was "meant" to do.

Did you just hear what you said. 20 games... THATS A LOT

oh and i guess i'm 12, i usually buy the newest COD to play with my "bros"

As of right now there were 16 Zelda games in 25 years. That's .63 games a year. Compare that to, say God of War for example, which has 6 games in 8 years, which is .75 games per year. (This is excluding remakes, rereleases, and other appearances.

It's come to my attention that a few people out there might think I dislike, or even hate them. I realize that I can argue a point to death and maybe my wording isn't the greatest to convey that I don't think anything negative towards you or any group of people. I also realized that I might come off as some crazy nut job that is a HUGE fan boy. Although, to say I don't love Nintendo would be a lie, I don't hate the other console makers (I was a die hard fan boy as a child) and I hope they do well and will probably buy a MS Xbox 720 or a PS4. The primary reason, however, that I sound like a die hard fan boy is because I defend Nintendo and never admit to their mistakes. Truth be told, I haven't really heard (on a regular basis) the mistakes Nintendo has made for me to actually agree with them.

Which brings me to this topic. Nintendo has made mistakes with the 3DS and the Wii U, and one of them are inherently related to another because of the first mistake. But before I get into these three mistakes I see Nintendo has made -- thus far -- I have to get into the history of the DS and Wii lines. I also do not want to be considered to have yet another DOOM AND GLOOM thread, so I will end my editorial/post with the future and where I think Nintendo is heading.

History:

Nintendo was in a bad spot with the Gamecube, and they knew it. It was a whole new world and Nintendo was behind the curve. The GCN had HORRIBLE marketing. They did a good job on being everywhere -- theatre's, TV shows maybe even the internet -- but the ad's were weird and didn't convey the right message. The launch was not horrible. However, the third Nintendo President stepped down and for the first time in their 113 years they are appointing a non-family member to be President of Nintendo. That is right, boys and girls. Nintendo -- originally a card playing company -- was a family run company (http://nintendo.wiki...Nintendo_people). This was a good choice because Iwata did a lot of things that made Nintendo a successful company. The Nintendo DS and Wii were his children, and they made Nintendo rich. So people -- remember -- he is making mistakes with the 3DS and Wii U, but his rein as King isn't as bad as it could have been. He brought a new golden age for Nintendo, one the company hasn't seen since the SNES days. He ushered in a console that is one of the fastest selling consoles of all time.

Moving on, the GCN was launched and there was not much he could do. He introduced a silver color to give another option. I am sure he made a lot of other choices that I missed as a child, but really since he wasn't the head huncho during the consoles development he couldn't have made the changes that should have been made. He during this time introduce the idea of the Wiimote. Originally said to be an add on to the GCN, it became clear that the GCN didn't have the install base they wanted. So they started to develop the idea of the Wii.

Interesting enough, Nintendo was not sure if there was a casual market for gamers. They were not sure if a radical new motion controller would be a run away success. So they played it safe. Released a Nintendo DS -- the THIRD WHEEL as it was called -- as a test. They gave it two screens, a basic design and some good games. It was a run away success. Soon we stopped hearing about the Game Boy and the DS was it. Release date of the Nintendo DS is important though. Nov 21 2004 (US). This meant that the DS was released almost two years in advance of the Wii (Revolution at the time). This means they had time to change gears and go another route if it failed. Don't believe me that this was their plan? Explain why they called it the third wheel when we never got the GBA2. Hmm? Any thoughts? It's not like it wasn't in development. It was scratched because Nintendo was trending a different path.

A little unknown fact, Nintendo was rumored to be developing two home consoles. One, was a powerhouse with a regular controller. Another, was a GCN-like console with a radical new redesign and new controller based off motion control. Now the motion control wasn't actually known then, but the specs were part of the rumor. It wasn't until the Wii was revealed that it became clear. Nintendo was making an escape route. If the DS failed, the third wheel goes away, GBA2 would be released and the Wii would never have been born. Who knows, maybe Revolution would have been it's name. A quick tidbit, originally the Wiimote wasn't going to have the nunchuck. It was just the wiimote. Then Retro suggested the idea.

Mistakes:

So, this leads me into Nintendo -- and Iwata's -- mistakes. I shown you how Nintendo tested an idea. Gave themselves enough time to make changes so they wouldn't have two failures in a row. With the 3DS, why didn't they do this again? It was clear that Iwata and Nintendo was trying to help third party developers. Nintendo has always had trouble working with third parties. One of the many reasons developers have trouble is that Nintendo sell's their platforms. People buy the Wii and DS for Nintendo games. They have a 360 or PS3 or Vita for their hardcore games. Nintendo probably thought if they allowed third party developer sell their console and they didn't release anything major right away that developers would spend more money and maybe do better. What ended up happening was a horrible mistake. Those games weren't system sellers, and Nintendo was left out in the cold. Whoever made that choice -- probably Iwata -- clearly made an error that could have been avoided with the Wii U if they didn't release them so close together.

3DS Launched March 27 2011 (US) and Wii U Nov 18 2012 (US). Little over a year to make those changes needed. Nintendo all ready planned for their heavy hitters to be released in 2013 when the other consoles were probably going to be released. Not a horrible idea. Compete with Sony and Microsoft by releasing Mario Kart U, Mario U (3D), and whatever Retro is working on. Maybe even tease SSBU for Wii U with an awesome trailer saying it will be released in 2014, looking into the future. As long as third party developers give them a system seller at the launch, all would be fine. ZombiU was probably going to be that game. Problem is, what other exclusive third party game was going to be a system seller? So Nintendo had to do something post-3DS launch. They didn't have time nor could they afford a rushed Mario U. So they made NSMBU. It is 2D, simple and easy. Hopefully that could move some systems while Nintendo works around the clock on getting content ready for the 2013 invasion. Don't believe me? Look at Retro Studios and E3 2012. It was clear that they were building up to something. There was whispers afterwards that Retro pulled their footage because it wasn't ready. Wasn't ready? That's the point. Nintendo didn't have a system seller ready. Pikman 3, the closet thing to a system seller, has even been delayed and was suppose to be a launch title.

So far, I have covered mistake number one and two. As you can see, they are related. If they didn't make mistake number one, mistake number two could have been avoided. The third and final mistake is the IBM Power-Based CPU. And not because it is weak (which I still doubt). It's a mistake, which sadly it is possible they could have seen this coming if they gave them a two year window between 3DS and Wii U launch, because third party developers are going to have to make a choice when making multiplat's. Once the next gen is in full gear and 360 and PS3 are phased out, as we all know they will be, the only console or system using the Power ISA for games will be Nintendo. No one else in the world will be developing games for the Power ISA. In fact, EPIC has made it clear they aren't making Unreal 4 for Power ISA. Sure, they say Wii U but why do you think that is? Let's just assume that EPIC is right, and the Wii U can run Unreal 4 ("You heard the stupid gaffe yesterday about the Wii U," he said. "If someone wants to take Unreal Engine 4 and ship a game on Wii U, they can! If they wanna ship an Unreal Engine 4 game on Xbox 360, they could make it happen." {http://www.engadget....view-gdc-2013/} ) then why wouldn't they use resources to develop Unreal 4 for all three next gen consoles? It's because Microsoft and Sony are leaning towards x86 architecture, not Power ISA. That might be why it took Epic so long to come out and say that. Remember when they wouldn't confirm what platforms will run the Unreal 4 engine? I bet Microsoft hadn't made the choice if the processor would be Power ISA or x86. And in May -- I might eat my words (and hopefully, for Nintendo's sake, I do) -- Microsoft will reveal that they are using an AMD CPU and GPU. ( http://www.slashgear...y-cut-09276992/ ) As you can see, that idea isn't coming from no where. It's based on current speculation.

Which means, EPIC would have to spend more money and time on an architecture that no one will be using. This is not good for them. Why should they do that? I bet when we heard Epic was urging the console makers to use more powerful tech, that the actual conversation was please use x86. It makes it easier for developers and them. Everyone pretty much on the same playing field. Everyone besides Nintendo, of course.

Third party developers could also spend resources developing UNREAL 4 for the Wii U, but why should they. People buy Nintendo systems for Nintendo games.

So, those are the mistakes Nintendo made. In my point of view.

Future:

Now where is Nintendo heading? Are they heading towards their end? Will the House of Mario die out, like the House of Sonic did with the Dreamcast? The answer is no. Nintendo, unlike Sega, is sitting on a lot of cash. They have the money to develop -- unlike with the Wii -- a new form of controlling games and HD hardware. To develop their own DVD that has a lot of space. These things aren't cheap. It's why the Wii U is currently loosing profit on every system sold. It's not because of how much it costs to actually produce the parts or buy them. It's because they have to pay the R&D back, which they aren't currently. It'll get cheaper and better as time goes on. Not a huge problem. Again, Nintendo is sitting on a lot of money.

I believe that once they launch their system sellers there will be no stopping Nintendo. They won't end up last, or if they do it won't matter because the numbers are so close everyone would be at the same spot. As a side note, I don't think anyone will be a looser this gen. Looking at this generation, the PS3 and Xbox 360 are so close that I consider them both second place. You can't say selling over 70 million units is a bad thing. I for one didn't see Sony doing that. They did, though. This generation I see everyone selling, in the end, around the same amount.

I think -- hopefully -- that this experience taught Iwata something. That they don't need gaps in games. With all these games in the works, they should always have system sellers sold every Quarter of the year. If they can do that with little to no gaps, they could end up having a second Wii on their hands -- which means I would eat my words, because the others won't see that success. However, I don't know if Nintendo can do that. Hopefully they can.

I am typing this on my PC, not my cell phone, so hopefully it will be more thought out and less mistakes I am sure I am know for. Hopefully you enjoyed this and hopefully we will have some nice debates that spring from this post. So ... post and debate! Let's have fun

http://m.joystiq.com...ame-bankruptcy/

So a game called Game Dev Tycoon was released, and it allows you to start a video game company in the 80's and work your way through the market without going bankrupt. It mostly follows real events: they have knock-off names for Nintendo, Sega, Capcom, Sony, etc. It's an interesting game, but the best part is what they did about anti-piracy. To send a message to people, they released a "cracked" version of the game for free on Pirate Bay, and an authentic one on their website. The cracked version was identical except for one thing: after a few hours you will find out that people are pirating your game, and it will lead to your downfall. After that, any game that is well recieved will be pirated, resulting in low sales.

But that's not the best part. People who pirated the game have been going on their website saying, "after a few hours it says all of my games are being pirated! What's wrong with it?" and, "It's ruining my company!" This is probably the best anti-piracy measure I have ever seen in a game. What do you think about it, and what is your favorite anti-piracy measure that you've heard of?

Nintendo exclusives.

  

Nintendo exclusives.

That's my primary reason too. I've always been a multiplatform gamer and will continue to be one. Owning one console you always end up on missing a lot of great games.

Nintendo will most likely handle it just like Sony and Microsoft. If the system registers as being tampered with or has an unauthorized device hooked up to it then as soon as you go online, your account will be blocked and unable to access the any online feature.

 

Obviously there is nothing Nintendo can do if you plan on keeping the Wii U offline, but I honestly don't see the Wii U being that big of a source of pirating compared to the 360 and PS3