This is very exciting news but why do i feel so skeptical about the wii u?? Maybe crytek could be making the next metroid game?? That would be insane!!!!

I highly doubt Nintendo would hand one of its franchises over to a western developer that they themselves don't own. The second coming is more likely to happen tomorrow than Crytek ever producing a metroid game.

Although I know that (unless something HUGE happened in the industry) Nintendo will never fork over the Metroid license to Crytek...

The prospect makes me tingly inside.

The best thing that could happen for the Metroid franchise is simply for Nintendo to beef-up Retro and hand the franchise back to them. It was the most popular it has ever been in the 3D gens in their hands and its doubtful that anyone else would be able to engage the current fanbase to a higher degree. First I'd rather Retro handle another IP perhaps a full blown Donkey Kong not merely a retro side scroller, but no doubt no one would better revive the Metroid franchise than Retro. Crytek themselves are a poor choice for Metroid anyway. Metroid is so much more than merely a third or first person shooter. Crytek's specialties don't really apply to the creation of a game like Metroid.

If you read my last post about the leaks (the one in which I leaked an image myself), you'd know that these are supposed to be pictures of a developer unit with no working disc drive. So that slot you see isn't really a slot for anything.

They're not real Feld0. You shouldn't get your hopes up regarding images from a console that has only recently been in production, or potentially isn't in production yet. If you've ever seen an early Nintendo dev kit you'd understand that these devices don't fit the bill. Early dev kits are crudely built devices in the case of Cafe we're likely talking about a butchered PC.

Every last leaked photo is fake. The Nintendo logo was wrong of the first few leaked images and many of the others have obvious features that give them away as being fake. Manufacturing of this console only recently started leaked photos should be of the developer kit not prototypes, which would be secretly held at Nintendo. If any of you have ever seen a photo of a early Nintendo dev kit you'll understand that usually these devices are very crude. The early DS dev kits where made out of two butchered GBA's with a Super Nintendo controller. The current Nintendo Cafe/Stream dev kits are likely butchered PC's.

Edit: I believe I've already stated this somewhere on this blog, but anyway these fake photo leaks are created using a Windows 7 software box with fake connections. They could even used photoshop to create the majority of image. They are fake and not worth noting Nintendo would be on these rumors quicker than flies to garbage would an actual photo leak.

i hope they go back to cartridge i mean i always thought it was superior to disc i mean cartridges are pretty cheap now and the console could be pretty small without a disc drive

Cartridges have several advantages to disks like the capability for near lack of loading times, co-processors, and extra ram, but I don't think it would be wise to switch back to cartridges. They simply aren't cheap enough yet to have capacities large enough to compete with other options available. One option that may be possible next generation is holographic storage. It removes a considerable amount of the cartridge's advantage regarding loading times with Tapestry Media having transfer rates of 20 MB/s in read write mode and up to 300GB of storage estimated last I can find at 6 to 20 cents per GB. Holographic storage is also compared to other disk formats extremely scratch resistant and a drive should still be able to play Wii and Gamecube games. As a retro bonus Tapestry Media has a cartridge/floppy disk like design. Nintendo had a stake in this technology with a joint patent with Inphase Technology, though all progress has potentially stopped because of recent troubles at Inphase, which now is under new ownership.

i hope they go back to cartridge i mean i always thought it was superior to disc i mean cartridges are pretty cheap now and the console could be pretty small without a disc drive

Cartridges have several advantages to disks like the capability for near lack of loading times, co-processors, and extra ram, but I don't think it would be wise to switch back to cartridges. They simply aren't cheap enough yet to have capacities large enough to compete with other options available. One option that may be possible next generation is holographic storage. It removes a considerable amount of the cartridge's advantage regarding loading times with Tapestry Media having transfer rates of 20 MB/s in read write mode and up to 300GB of storage estimated last I can find at 6 to 20 cents per GB. Holographic storage is also compared to other disk formats extremely scratch resistant and a drive should still be able to play Wii and Gamecube games. As a retro bonus Tapestry Media has a cartridge/floppy disk like design. Nintendo had a stake in this technology with a joint patent with Inphase Technology, though all progress has potentially stopped because of recent troubles at Inphase, which now is under new ownership.

Yeah, I've been wondering when Nintendo will start using holographic storage. I'm not sure if they can get it out cheap enough yet.
It would be awesome if they brought it out next gen.

Tapestry Media as far as the disks are concerned likely are ready even with the latest issues at Inphase Technologies. Imagine a floppy disk about the size of a Gamecube disk with more than three times the storage of a single layer Blu-Ray disk, super fast loading times, and possibly not costing much more than a comparable Blu-Ray disk. A 150GB disk for instance could cost from $9 US to $30 US based on previous estimates. Sounds high, but it could potentially beat Blu-Ray XL at similar capacities as far as price goes. The issue are the drives the Tapestry Media drives last I knew where large and very expensive, but the joint patent between Nintendo and Inphase Technologies points to a miniaturization in the technology. The final issue though is I'm not sure if any real progress has been made because of the financial issues at Inphase.

I'm sure it could but it would have to be with low settings, lol.



I was impressed with the background but something about the bird just seemed off...idk what it is.

Anyways, that was a tech demo, not representative of graphics during actual gameplay.

Remember the Quantic Dream's tech demo for the PS3 that had everyone's jaws dropping to the floor? Well it took Quantic Dreams 4 years to actually to be able to make a game with those visuals (Heavy Rain) and even then it wasn't on par with that original tech demo...and to even get close to it, the entire game had to be done in QT events.

Other than Heavy Rain, no game has even come close to what they showed off in that Tech Demo for the PS3 and we're well into the systems life cycle...if games were going to be able to do it, they'd have done it already.

It's entirely possible (if not likely) that it'll be the same for the Wii U with it's tech demo's.

Not that it would be a bad thing, it's still a MAJOR step up from the original Wii and short of people who made the massive mistake of actually buying into all the b/s pre-reveal hype no one expected a modern day graphical powerhouse from Nintendo.



I'm not against Nintendo, I love me some Zelda, Mario, DK and Kirby. I'm against people who try to irrationally overrate products or features of products.

You have to look at Nintendo's attitude regarding tech demos and general tech specs. Really the reason Nintendo stopped releasing technical specs regarding its systems is what happened with GameCube. Sony and Microsoft give the media fluffed specs regarding their consoles, which simply wasn't possible in a full game setting. Nintendo on the other hand were more honest and openly discussed the capabilities of the GameCube and the whole situation soured on them. This isn't Sony or Microsoft where consistently you can expect them to show case a tech demo simply not possible on the hardware in a game. Nintendo's tech demos for certain franchises for instance often end up not quite as impressive as the finished product and it wouldn't be like Nintendo to show case a demo that didn't represent what the console is truly capable of pulling off.

The "Hawk" statement comes from the complete version of the Japanese Garden tech demo. After the Japanese koi fish the demo continues with a hawk or falcon that then precedes to move around the garden as the seasons change ending with the falcon playing in the snow on one of the roofs. This tech demo is something you really needed to see in person at the event or through high quality video to get the full effect. It's actually quite impressive in my opinion certainly not something you can do on current consoles outside the PC. We don't yet have any real hard facts on the consoles specs, but from the IBM Watson statements we can determine its based on Power 7 architecture (honestly the only real choice Nintendo had anyway). It really is possible that Wii U's CPU could be a full generational leap over Xbox 360 and it wouldn't make sense if the GPU didn't match the CPU's capabilities. It still greatly depends on what exactly you expect from a generational leap and the specifics of the chipset. There likely will be a gab between Wii U and Xbox Next and PS4, but it likely isn't going to be as large as many think. Currently I'm thinking Dreamcast comparative to the GameCube or Xbox is about as bad as its going to get.

from what i know it wont be outdated it will be very powerful and graphics are at there max until 2016 when ultra high definition is meant to come out

It will be outdated from launch. The rumored GPU architecture AMD's R700 series is openGL 3.3 and DirectX 10.1 complaint when Nintendo's competitors GPU's will likely be openGL 4.1 and Direct3D 11 complaint. Technically there wouldn't be as large a difference in total functionality as the transition from openGL 3.3 to openGL 4.1 and DirectX 10.1 to Direct3D 11 primarily was simply fixing the issues with the previous API's and adding software based tessellation. Project Cafe's GPU will likewise be capable of tessellation through a hardware based operation AMD integrated into the R700 architecture,but it was hardly used outside tech demos. As far as raw power goes Nintendo's next console could very well be a true next gen leap. There are GPU's in the R700 series that would give an eight to ten times increase over current consoles. It depends on whether Nintendo utilizes a double GPU. The rumored size and price of the console at around the size of the original Xbox and costing from $350 to $400 U.S. dollars because of high manufacturing costs points to the possibility its packing a lot more power than many expect. The only reason N6 ends up being a mid generation increase in power at an expected TDP of 150 watts or more judging from the rumored size is if it uses over the shelf PC parts.

Regarding hardware and software the console will be outdated by release, but few games even use open GL 3.3 and DX 10.1 so there is a level of complexity possible using existing API's that you don't see in majority of games possible on the console. Whether it will be outdated in regard to its hardware's raw power comes down to exactly what R700 series GPU the console's own GPU is based on. The three options I'm hoping for is Radeon HD 4850, Radeon HD 4870, or Radeon HD 4890, which would mean a four, five, or six times more powerful than Xenos. If Nintendo is serious about maintaining 3D party support for the long hall they may choose either a Radeon HD 4850x2 or a Radeon HD 4870x2 equivalent dual GPU, which would mean eight to ten times as powerful as the Xbox 360. Ironically optimizing proven tech from 2008 seems a very Nintendo thing to do and both a Radeon HD 4850x2 and Radeon HD 4870x2 are likely the cheapest way to equal a jump in power equal to the jump from PS2/Xbox to Xbox 360/PS3. I'm reasonably optimistic that Nintendo's next console will be reasonably powerful just on there rumored focus on 3D party developers and regaining the hardcore. Only issue is tessellation, which would be in software with Xbox 3/PS4 and on hardware with N6. Ultimately tessellation will be the largest visual improvement next gen the rest of the power will be utilized for more subtle things, but it would take longer to learn to utilize in hardware tessellation capabilities. The year to year and a half headstart the console may have on the market may remove that issue for any dev that seriously utilizes its hardware.

I wouldn't be surprised should THQ and potentially a few other third party developers have some knowledge on the Wii's successor that's far more concrete than anything in the rumor mill. A few developers have given me the impression they may know something regarding Nintendo's next console, which if it is going to be announced this year and released next year like the current rumors are buzzing about it would make sense that third party developers are already working on games.

I'd rather see someone at Nintendo finally bring the gameplay of Donkey Kong Country into the third dimension. I enjoyed Donkey Kong 64, but I wouldn't call it the ideal transition from a side scrolling platformer to a third person platformer. I'm relatively positive this would be good challenge for Retro and if done right it could easily give Nintendo a third heavy hitter. The tp's idea itself wouldn't be bad as a downloadable game for the Wii U or a full game for the 3DS.

Individuals shouldn't worry too much about how Wii U will compare to Xbox 720 or PS4. If these consoles launch a year after Wii U technical issues would keep them from jumping anymore than fifty percent more powerful than Wii U if indeed the console is about equivalent to a Radeon HD 4850. Even if these consoles launch nearly two years after Wii U it would still be impossible to place Wii U in the same situation as the Wii.

The likely way the Virtual Console will noticeably change is by included Gamecube games to the preexisting service. I doubt there will be many at launch though merely a few of the more popular games. Outside that something I always thought Nintendo could do with the Virtual Console is offer a monthly subscription to stream access to previous games. It would be smart on Nintendo's part to do so as individuals that may not buy many games from the Virtual Console may very likely be willing to pay $11.99 a month for unlimited access. As far as storage looking at the 3DS the Wii's successor will more than likely have greater internal storage, but I have a feeling willing it will merely be 8 or 16 GBs of flash storage with the option to expand memory storage by SSD cards. At most an option to buy a dedicated external hard drive may be included among the early accessories.

More RAM and HD may be all High Voltage Software wants, but from statements from Satoru Iwata and other big names at Nintendo more RAM and HD isn't enough to warrant a successor to the Wii. Nintendo isn't stupid. Satisfying the wants and needs of developers is one thing, but they have to make sure gamers would want to buy the system first. A Wii with more RAM and HD would be in my opinion a complete failure on the market. A large portion of the Wii's current market simply may not reliably upgrade regardless and hardcore gamers outside Nintendo fans would have little reason to buy the product.

All of the wii controllers and the gamecube controller will be able to be used. As for games, they might put gamecube games on virtual consoles or the store.they will have for sure, wii games.

GameCube controllers are out a long with GameCube backwards compatibility. The Wii U is merely backwards compatible with Wii. This mostly is because the ports for GameCube controllers and memory cards has been removed.

I don't think they are better than the ps3 or xbox, but I suppose it's equal to them. Now nintendo has a chance to redeem themselves from the wii. And actually compete.

The Wii U is significantly more powerful than either the PS3 or Xbox 360. Both tech demos show cased that fact simply how much more powerful is the question. Rumors before E3 pointed to a theoretical figure of something between 4x to possibly 6x the capability of Xbox 360 depending on how the rumored chipsets where customized. The only thing in doubt about the full capability of the console was whether it could be considered a full generational leap over current consoles. As a measuring stick going by those original rumors there isn't any reason with optimizing the code for a closed box system that majority of the more graphically impressive games that have recently come out for the PC could run on Wii U on their highest settings.

There's a rumor going on on NeoGAF saying that the WiiU's CPU is based on Watson's Power7 CPU. Although that doesn't mean that your WiiU could beat you in Jeopardy because Watson's a gigantic cluster with 2880 cores and 16 TB of RAM, it still means that the WiiU uses considerably newer tech than PS360. Let's hope the GPU will be good enough not to bottleneck the CPU.

This bit of information though is extremely interesting. Basically the only thing that can be taken from it is that Wii U's CPU is Power 7 based, but that means far more power than many expected. Depending on the number of cores, the clock speed, and exactly how the chip has been customized it could theoretically be a full generational leap over Xenon. Going by the AMD press release the GPU may be something from the Radeon HD 5xxx to 7xxx family of GPU's instead of the originally rumored 4XXX family of GPU's. Which would result in a better feature set, better performance with a lower TDP, and would benefit from AMD Eyefinity technology. The biggest issues I'm worried about regarding Wii U now is its total RAM.

Forget the rumors.... lets talk about the my first question. I asked a question which i thought had facts to back it up. we know nintendo made billions off the Wii. so can they not afford to put more up to date tech into their console. i was just posing a question and every nintendo fan on here took it as a personal attack on them. open up your mind people!

This is merely Nintendo creating console hardware based on the same principles that went into the creation of practically every console ever made. Individuals forget or simply don't realize that using the latest tech has never been within the equation of creating console hardware before the Xbox 360 and PS3. The tech behind consoles in the past was old by time the consoles hit the market often by several years. The gap on the age of the technology within a console has steadily decreased since the Nintendo Entertainment System, but still for instance the age of the GPU technology rumored to be used in the Wii U is rather equivalent with what we saw in the previous generation of consoles at launch.

This isn't anything really to be worried about itself neither Sony nor Microsoft are likely to use bleeding edge tech in their consoles though certainly more up to date than Nintendo. How far behind the capability of Nintendo's Wii U is to their competition really depends on what sort of memory they use, clock speeds, amount of customization, ext. Technical issues will greatly limit the capability of consoles this coming generation primarily because of high wattage from chipsets. I certainly expect Sony and Microsoft to have an edge regarding power, but it isn't going to be anything like the Wii in regards to the Xbox 360 or PS3.

Hopefully not to close

So far to my knowledge the only limitation is that you more or less have to be in the same room, but otherwise you don't have to be too close to the console

My other point was that Monster Hunter isn't the kind of game that needs the hardware to have good sales for it to sell well because Japanese gamers will buy the hardware for it. Also Nintendo said they're willing to invest in third party exclusives for the 3DS and Wii U so I'm sure they'd give a moneyhat to Capcom for Monster Hunter on Wii U. In fact I reckon they paid for Monster Hunter 4 to be exclusive to the 3DS as well.

Still why would Capcom create a Monster Hunter game for Wii U when they could simply make sequels for the Monster Hunter franchise and spin-off titles for 3DS and Vita. Handhelds are increasingly the preferred gaming devices for the Japanese market, where in their console market selling over 200,000 copies is extraordinary. Major Western franchises would crash at current dev costs within a similar sized market. The audience for Monster Hunter is completely complacent with a handheld experience. In other words there is no driving force for Capcom to develop a Monster Hunter game outside handhelds within its current market. The Wii U has to place itself as a major force in Japan like no console has done in recent memory or Nintendo has to foot the bill. Otherwise Monster Hunter for Wii U doesn't make financial sense for Capcom.

Because there's no reason why they can't make Monster Hunter for both handhelds and home consoles so they might as well cover both markets even if the handheld one is bigger.

The point is that not only is the market for handhelds larger, but the market for console games within Japan isn't large enough to warrant development on next gen HD hardware. There isn't a financial reason for Capcom to develop a game within the franchise for the Wii U. The Wii U has to enlarge the console market in Japan, the monster hunter series is going to need to find a western audience, or Nintendo needs to foot the bill otherwise Monster Hunter Wii U is very unlikely.

Not now since the price and constant flow of great games but earlier on they were pretty poor with even the PSP topping it. And my point was that Monster Hunter Tri came to the Wii because PS3 development costs were too high not because the Wii had higher sales. Monster Hunter fans will come to any console if it has Monster Hunter so even on a console with terrible sales Monster Hunter would still sell immensely well. That's Monster Hunter is so important companies like Nintendo and Sony because it gives consoles a massive boost in Japan.

I'm not sure I'm explaining myself completely. HD console development costs being a factor in why Wii got a Monster Hunter isn't something I have argued against. There simply so much more to why Capcom didn't create a Monster Hunter for the PS3 at the time than simply the high developer costs of HD development. It has to do with the market within Japan where Monster Hunter contains majority of its audience. The investment wasn't worth it compared to the market that existed for HD consoles within Japan at that time or now for that matter. Wii had a larger market, it wasn't too difficult to share resources from the PSP, and it represented a lower investment. The Japanese market is far too small today for extensive development on a franchise unless it has some significance in the West.

Monster Hunter going to the Wii U depends greatly with how good the Wii U sells in Japan. So much of the Monster Hunter's market is Japanese, which is why when the Japanese market moving toward handhelds instead of consoles the series moved to being a handheld focused franchise. Wii got a version of Monster Hunter partly because of its sells compared to PS3 and it represented far less of an investment for Capcom. The Wii U's presence in the Japanese Market is going to have to be significant for this franchise to ever see a console launch.

Not really the 3DS is getting to Monster Hunters despite poor sales. Wii got Monster Hunter solely for cheaper development costs not because of sales. I'm pretty sure it will, Monster Hunter's on PS2, PSP, Wii, 3DS, PS3 and even the Xbox 360 so I think are chances are pretty good. Heck Capcom said they were going to put it on the Nintendo DS but it wasn't powerful enough so they went for PSP.

The 3DS sales haven't been poor. Currently the handheld looks to out pace the first year sales of DS. The thing is regularly the top selling hardware in Japan since the price drop. Nintendo simply didn't push hard enough with the 3DS to maintain momentum at its previous price, but the DS suffered similar handling. Monster Hunter is a Japanese focused franchise. This is why I stated that the only way Wii U would get a Monster Hunter release is if the Wii U sells well in Japan. So much of the Japanese market is handhelds thus why this franchise with most of its focus in Japan has for the most part stuck with handhelds this gen. Monster Hunter for the 3DS is a natural fit for the Japanese Market. Monster Hunter for Wii U not so much. We'll have to see if the new controller helps the console create a market significant enough to warrant Capcom making a Monster Hunter game for the console.

Monster Hunter originally went to the Wii because of the franchise's Japanese market focus. There simply wasn't enough of an audience for the franchise to warrant HD developing costs because primarily the Japanese console market is too small to warrant that sort of investment. Wii U is going to have to over come that issue if Monster Hunter is ever going to grace its library. The touchscreen controller may very well help the console in that regard.

I was just going by the official press release.

Those sort of things are often full of PR. I'm merely speculating on the reasons that Wii got a Monster Hunter and how that compares to the possibility that Wii U will get a Monster Hunter release based both on official statements and common sense. The Wii U has to create a larger audience within Japan for Japanese console games or the Monster Hunter games for the 3DS have to create a reasonable audience within the west if they are going to be localized. Otherwise a Monster Hunter for the Wii U isn't really guaranteed. Outside this Nintendo would have to money hat to Capcom for a console version.