I think saying that basing a console on PC hardware is being "lazy" is very narrow minded.

The point is that costs have been constantly going up and if developers say they need thing to be easier you would be a fool to ignore them.

You also make it sound like neither Sony or Microsoft did any customisation at all which is not true.  They did exactly what Nintendo did, started with off-the-shelf designs and revised them accordingly.  The PS4 has a custom network processor and DSP, the Xbox One also has a custom DSP although arguably sticks much closer to the PC design - but as the company who makes Windows that is hardly surprising.

Consoles were custom because they had to be, PCs were very inefficient and this has slowly improved.  Nintendo stick with custom because it means exclusive titles have a huge advantage, but that is also why their key titles have taken so long to come out on Wii U.  Its also really annoyed the third-parties which is hardly a logical business decision.

So if anything, I would say its Nintendo that are shooting themselves in the foot here stubbornly refusing to change with the times.

yes i know, but they don't need to have TVii or whatever it's called, all they need is a app.

You still seem to be missing the point of TVii, that you only need to perform a single search to obtain results from ALL the services you have. 

So if you searched for Doctor Who it would tell you which episodes are available on iPlayer, Netflix and Lovefilm.  Even though I never use Netflix on WiiU due to the lack of surround sound support, I would use this.

I read it. Sounds like someone's butthurt over Nintendo not doing his job for him.

I disagree, its clear that Nintendo screwed up.  No way a developer should have been struggling to get a simple "Hello World" to run on a new console and if the debugger has issues, how exactly do you expect the developer to do their job?  Having to GUESS that the network code would work okay because you couldn't run it on proper debugging mode, seriously?

It sounded clear to me that Nintendo made it almost impossible for them to do their job and the end results makes it seem totally plausible.  Its perfectly understandable that with a poor experience like that, no developer is going to give it a second chance.

I mean come on, the sheer fact that the WiiU OS is still such a slow laggy mess should be a clue.  Sony aren't exactly fantastic when it comes to OS coding but the improvements between PS3 and PS4 are huge, its finally is up to Xbox 360 quality of experience (when ironically the Xbox One seems WORSE).  In comparison the WiiU OS experience is just a joke.  If the end user experience is poor, I can only imagine how bad the underlying code must be.

I am still very much looking forward to Mario Kart and Zelda, but that's not going to make me say the WiiU is something its not.  The only thing I can really say that is positive about the WiiU OS is that the backwards compatibility is fantastic.  Although that said, they could easily have made it compatible all the way back to Gamecube and I wouldn't have to go out and buy a Classic Controller to play N64 games.  So even there, its not perfect.

Perhaps they didn't word it exactly like that but I felt they made it fairly clear they were talking relative to other platforms.  I guess its difficult to judge how other people would interpret it.

I don't understand some of the logic in here that somehow the Eurogamer article is wrong because a few small developers can write perfectly fine on the Wii U.

That doesn't prove the developer was lazy or incompetent, it proves what we already knew - that it CAN be done but it costs too much time and money to be worthwhile if your game is also releasing on other much easier to write on platforms.

The Wii U is not a BAD platform to develop on, that is clear, but its certainly not as easy as the competition.  When you consider that even the Xbox One and PS4 now have an equal or larger install base than Wii U (and the code can easily be ported between those platforms as they are similar), its a no-brainer than the Wii U is just not third-party developer friendly, unless you are willing to commit a lot of resources to that single platform.

As many have said already, Nintendo thought they could capitalise on the popularity of the Wii and blew it. 

Is the Wii U a failure?  I don't think so, just as I never felt the Gamecube was a failure (and Nintendo certainly didn't, they made a profit on it).  But from a multi-platform developers point of view it is and that doesn't mean they are wrong, because the most important thing for them it for the platform to be profitable and its pretty clear the Wii U so far is not, for them.

I have said it before, based on the Wii I always expected the Wii U to be a platform only really worth buying exclusives on, I always intended to get a PS4 or One for multi platform titles.  The problem is that Nintendo promoted it otherwise and clearly did not support the port teams well enough to achieve that goal and then delayed their own titles so much that many of us felt ripped off.

Wouldn't make much sense for them to cancel a profitable product, even if they aren't selling huge numbers.

Considering the terrible track record SEGA have with Sonic I would definitely not praise them for this game until actually playing it.

Sonic Lost World sounded like a decent game, on paper, but it played dreadful IMO.  It was a Sonic game trying to be Mario, not what a Sonic fan wants at all.  As a whole I don't like Mario - Mario 64, Galaxy and the new 3D World are the only ones I actually enjoyed.

Give me Sonic Adventure 3 already, SA1 & 2 had their flaws but they were much more fun games than anything they have done since - except perhaps Generations which wasn't too bad.

I'm not happy about the money i invested in my WiiU at launch.

How I feel also. 

As I have ranted about before, I got the Premium for the extra memory and it annoys me that I still ended up having to use a USB memory stick because its the only way to get top speed on downloads.

I also never got any benefit from the bonus scheme because of the rip-off prices of buying games on the store and the poor download speeds (even using an external HDD) meant it wasn't worth it.

I feel I was conned into getting the Premium when it offers nothing over the basic really.  Also had I known all the games were going to be delayed, I might have waited.  At least on the 3DS we got the ambassador scheme which I felt was a fair apology, on Wii U we got nothing.

"one platform across multiple devices" sounds more like having Wii U games run on a 3DS-like device.  In fact that would be one good reason for keeping Nintendo home consoles somewhat low powered, so that they can make a comparable portable and you buy the game on one device and automatically get it on the other.

Basically its the same principle as what Sony have already done with a few indie games, you buy it on PS3 and get the Vita version bundled in.  It DOES however depends on you buying all your games as downloads.  Then again, Nintendo prices would actually be REASONABLE if you got both versions, they are only pricey when you consider its for a single platform and retail sells cheaper.

This is actually something I have been waiting for since Xbox 360 launched as Microsoft were talking about it but it never really got anywhere.  Sony beat them to it in actually implementing it but sadly its still not happening for retail games, its too profitable to charge us twice.

The Wii U is not profitable (at the moment).

I was referring to the fact that they said from the start they only have to sell one game to break even on the Wii U console.

That doesn't mean they necessarily paid off all the cost of designing the console, but getting rid of any potential for selling more Wii U games wouldn't exactly put them in a better position.

The point is, they have already manufactured the consoles and are making games for it.  The only thing that CAN happen if they dropped it is making an even deeper loss, as all that manufacturing and development is suddenly worthless.  Plus as other people have said, no way people will buy the NEXT console if they drop the Wii U this soon and definitely not if they supported other consoles.

Te biggest reason the Wii U is not making them money right now is because they spent a lot more time/money making the games in the first place.  Its going to take a while to make up for that.

i don't think the 3DS can support HD...

It can't support SD either

Then again, the PS Vita is just slightly higher than SD (quarter HD) but that doesn't stop Sony having games with HD in the name on the system.

I wish they would release high-bitrate torrents of things like this, like the few Eurogamer do for comparisons.

Video quality can hide imperfections in poor quality graphics as well as make high quality graphics look comparable to lower quality.

This was all too apparent with the many AC4 videos that made the current-gen and next-gen versions look comparable, when in reality even the difference between 720p and 1080p at the SAME graphical quality is pretty obvious.

I guess its too much to hope that YouTube will keep the same bitrates when using WebM V9 so that we actually see a drastic improvement in picture quality.

Because at bitrates high enough to prevent visible quality loss the file sizes are pretty big and the bandwidth costs of hosting it increase dramatically.

Eurogamer have said they do not often make those high quality comparison videos available for that very reason, and that is even considering they DO provide torrents so some of their bandwidth is offset.

Check out the bayo trailer on my site.
It's 700 MB I think 3,400 MB/s and 720p 60 fps.
Looks incredible. Your eyes will water, then melt.
 

General
Complete name                  : Http://Nollog.Net/MyBin/Bayonetta2.mov
Format                         : MPEG-4
Format profile                 : QuickTime
Codec ID                       : qt  
File size                      : 607 MiB
Duration                       : 2mn 42s
Overall bit rate               : 31.4 Mbps
Encoded date                   : UTC 2014-02-11 20:36:33
Tagged date                    : UTC 2014-02-11 20:47:59
Writing library                : Apple QuickTime
Media/UUID                     : 5CCCD7A7-3107-4606-A46B-74066B2DAEE8
©TIM                           : 00:00:00:00
©TSC                           : 60
©TSZ                           : 1

Yup, that's more like it.  Although most games wouldn't be quite as brain-meltingly active so would cope with a lower bitrate than that.

Most Bluray movies have a lower average bitrate than that, but then while they are higher resolution they also have a much much lower frame rate.

You also have to bear in mind that the TV in use will make a BIG difference.

When I upgraded to a TV with horrific input lag it was particularly obvious on the Wii.

I honestly don't know why every modern console game doesn't do that (including the Wii U Menu, which sadly only runs at native 720p).

I'm guessing its down to a 1080p frame buffer still being a tradeoff (especially on Wii U/Xbox One with limited dedicated RAM) compared to a 720p frame buffer.  It may be better to just save some of that RAM for effects.

After all the work they did with Super Mario 3D World, I feel they should make a Super Mario 64 style game with the engine they have now. Oh man, that would just be the best thing for me

Same here.  I am really enjoying 3D World which is quite a surprise as I HATE having a time limit. (I hated all the original Mario World games and suspect I might even fall out with this on later levels)

I much prefer having time to really investigate the world and appreciate its beauty, and solve puzzles.  I don't have anyone to play multiplayer with either so that functionality is of no use to me.

Can't say I'm impressed with this.  While I never played anything online on Wii, this comes across as a desperate attempt to force the people who did into buying Wii U. 

It also mocks the Wii U backwards compatibility.  What good is 100% compatibility if they slowly shut down functionality?  Even Microsoft gave it 4 years before they shut down original Xbox Live, although granted those people WERE paying for it.

Still, Nintendo should be trying to come across as BETTER than the competition, not worse.

Whats innovative about the Wii U?

Sticking a touchscreen in the controller is no more/less innovative than a touchpad on the controller.  Heck, the Wii U is lacking one of the most useful things on modern consoles - the analog triggers.  I also find it the least ergonomic controller in a long while ESPECIALLY from Nintendo.  Both the N64 and Gamecube controllers felt comfortable in your hands, the Wii U Gamepad does not.

Its more about evolution.  The PS4 is an improvement on PS3 (hugely on the controller, its actually comfortable which no dualshock has ever been for me), the Xbox One is (or will be, once they put the functionality back in the OS) an evolution of the Xbox 360 + Kinect, they are just refinements over what went before.

If anything, the PS4 is the biggest improvement because I hated its old controller so much and it inherited the speaker in the controller that really enhanced surround sound.

For the record, I do find the touchscreen on Wii U useful especially for inventory management.  But when playing games like LEGO City Undercover, I never once felt that "this game plays better BECAUSE of the touchscreen".  It would have been just as much fun without the gimmicky bits.  Same when playing LEGO Marvel on PS4, the only time the touchscreen would have been useful is the map and the ONLY reason that was an issue is because the game was poorly optimised so took a few seconds to display the map screen.  Had it been better optimised so the map appeared instantly, it would have been no better as if you have to take your eyes off the TV you might as well just display it on the TV in the first place.

What i mean is all the features on ps4 are available on ps3 or its easy to create on ps3

No they are not, because of the huge increase in RAM mainly.  Also the fact it can access the HDD quicker than PS3.

Streaming to twitch.tv/Remote Play/Saving your last 15 minutes of gameplay.  This is all done due to hardware encoding, the PS3 didn't have that which is why only a few games worked with remote play as those games had to specifically use LESS CPU power for the game and be optimised to work with the software video streaming tech.  Also to be able to remote play from power off you effectively had to leave the PS3 powered on, the PS4 uses ten times less electricity in standby than the PS3 did in remote play off mode.  Likewise the PS4 will be able to suspend your current game in RAM and go into standby in the future, so you can instantly resume playing.

Then there is just general OS improvements.  Being able to go into the Playstation Store without quitting your active game, how quickly you can go look at your trophies without quitting the game (PS3 is very slow as it has a tiny amount of RAM for system tasks), how background downloading works.  Its just a more pleasant OS to use and that is because of the improvements in the hardware.

These are the sorts of improvements I expected Wii U to have over Wii and sadly it does not.  Its still slow and clunky going into different sections of the OS.

I can put my Wii games in my WiiU. I can put PSone games in my PS2/PS3. I can use my Genesis controller on my SEGA Master System.

Those with a Gen1 Genny with a converter could play SMS games on Genny. I can play DS games in my 3DS. I can gplay GBA games in my DS Lite. I can play some Xbox games on my 360. Shenmue II being one of them. Gamecube games on my Wii. Even for Atari 5200 people were not happy it was not BC. So they fixed that the next system.

 

For people who collect consoles BC isn't as big a issue but for those who do not. It is. Would not cost them that much more to put PS3 on a chip and put it in the PS4. When Sony did it for PS3 it cost 27$ to produce. It got cheaper quickly before they abandoned it. BC doesn't cost much. Nintendo does it and they are scrutinized and accused of being cheap with consoles. WiiU has Wii on a chip. All MS and Sony had to do but they are the ones getting a free pass. So yes they want you to buy some other service or on their store the game you already bought.

It's a load of BS.

Actually, putting a PS3 in the PS4 would be VERY expensive, as none of the hardware is remotely similar.  Its not just a chip, you would have to replicate everything and then tie it into the PS4 OS somehow.

While I would LOVE to have BC on the PS4 so I only have one console, I would even have been willing to pay £100 more for that facility, most people would not.  So they would have needed two SKUs and with having enough trouble manufacturing the standard PS4, and getting the OS barely functional for launch, it would have delayed things and given Microsoft the upper hand.

How about the fact that it actually HAS a tablet. One that works very well in game interactions such as Batmans batarang, Sniping, off TV play, video chat, even blowing into the mic to affect game play, browsing the internet, universal remote, etc. 

 

The only issue has been that it hasn't been utilized enough.

 

Then there is the fact that it has had its own social network since launch.

OH GOD NO!  I find games that utilise blowing into the mic to be the most annoying gimmick EVER.  Its even more annoying than waving your arms around with Kinect.

I liked the concept of the Gamepad, but by making it so multi-purpose (being able to put it in a stand for video chat, lay on the floor for golf, dock it as a gun sight) they messed up the ergonomics so its actually uncomfortable for its main purpose - being a standard dual-analog stick controller with a touchscreen in the middle.  The fact they then omitted the analog triggers, that the Gamecube had, was the icing on the cake.  I really don't know what they were thinking.

I would get a pro controller but quite frankly I do not use the Wii U enough to justify the cost.

So again the Wii U innovative?  Not so much.  Even the few unique things it does such as the game where you swipe things at the screen, the gamepad actually feels too cumbersome in one hand for that to work very well.  They forgot what made the Wiimote so popular, that it was small, light and easy to use.