Desert Punk

Wii vs gamecube is a difficult subject really. The gamecube was had much greater multi-format support and was a technical tour de force for its day. I would have to say one of the greatest things about the wii is is gamecube compatibility. I've actually used my wii more for gamecube games than wii games. Zelda windwaker was utterly amazing. Considering how poorly the gamecube sold it was clearly a fantastic opportunity for wii owners who may have never experienced gamecube games to actually play those games.

 

 

The trouble with the wii is many of the top developers had already moved away from the wii to develop for the 360 and PS3 and therefore the wii seemed to get the top nintendo games, a handful of good third party games but mainly a large amount of casual games. The gamecube got a huge range of fully optimised games from top developers even though it wasn't a commercial success like wii. Typically when a call of duty or medal of honor game was developed for xbox and ps2 the gamecube would get a version too of the same game where as with the wii it got far less conversions and because of the power difference they were often cut down versions missing important features.

 

The Gamecube was a truly terrific console with amazing software support and the last Nintendo home console that competed technically with its competitors. One of the greatest things about it was its fantastic loading speed. It almost seemed like it used cartridges. It would load games so quickly.

I don't think Sega are the guilty party here. Gearbox appears to have screwed them over by taking their money and using that money for other projects. The aliens game looks to be under-developed and very weak compared to other gearbox games. The wii u doesn't need this game if it will be to the same standard as the other formats.

Absolutely hate the monster hunter games. I love the look of them and admire the amount of polish but soon as I start playing them they just don't work for me. This game also does the wii u no favours visually.

I don't mind ports I just want properly enhanced ports making good use of the gamepad, the extra memory and full use of the optical disc so more content than 360 games. The PS3 rarely got enhanced games because it was using the same resources as the 360 version so much of the blu-ray disc was wasted. I hope now we see some games that make more use of the extra storage. Also the ps3 and wii u support full quality multi-channel lpcm audio which the 360 doesn't. Support for that would be nice too. A bit annoyed with the 360 dictating poor audio and game engine movie sequences etc all the time. I'd prefer pre-rendered movie sequences if they are done in stunning 1080p quality with a high quality soundtrack.  Its especially annoying as pre-rendered playback on ps3 often happens immediately without having to load additional assets, its more seamless where as movie sequences using the game engine have to be loaded in and played then the level data loaded back in again to play the game.

The wii u has strengths and weaknesses and just want to see games properly optimised for wii u and not lazy ports.

I think people need to realise the mindset of Nintendo and remember the situation with the original wii. Also you have to bare in mind that with a gpu there is a feature set and there is performance. The wii u gpu may have additional features over the older 360 and PS3 gpus but it may not necessarily outperform them with regards performance in polygons and texturing.

The wii u is easy to develop for and there are limitations which we do know as fact like the memory having 40% less bandwidth than PS3/360 approx. While we don't know the spec of the gpu or cpu fully we know its memory specification which indicates the performance of the system will be capped to work with that memory. There is little potential for increased performance later on when the memory chips are slower than those fitted to the 360 and PS3. The wii u is a good clean design without the bottlenecking issues of  PS3 for example but we know the wii u performance is current gen nothing more.

The wii u should be capable of doing anything the ps3 or 360 can do but sometimes a few compromises may be needed to reduce load on the cpu and in other areas it can see improvements thanks to additional memory and improved gpu feature set. The wii u is competitive with the curren gen models but won't be with the next generation from a performance viewpoint. I honestly think all known evidence supports this.

There were a lot of forum comments going about prior to launch at how the wii u was a next gen system and super powerful and would compete with the next playstation and xbox but this was never going to happen. Unfortunately because of these fanboy posts many people's expectations were un-realistically raised and there are numerous posts all over the internet with people disappointed with what the wii u  is offering.

You buy a Nintendo console if you love Nintendo games and the type of games than Nintendo consoles get mainly. The wii u is a brilliant package overall and I'm really enjoying mine. The gamepad introduces a new direction in gaming just like the wii motion controller did.

If you want a powerful gaming system don't bother with a console get a PC which offers a lot more tech for your buck.

I own a PS3 and 360 as well as wii u and can see the appeal of all 3. Remember the wii launched with a spec inferior to the original xbox but still went on to massive success because it never competed in the same area and appealed to different consumers.

Nintendo used to run love hotels which were basically brothels in japan. I think  Nintendo know its in their interests to create a family friendly image for their consoles nowadays but the history of the firm is a bit seedy to say the least. It's like Walt Disney he hated jews and was a real b**tard but Disney to many represents a family friendly firm despite its roots.

Commercial companies manipulate their image to make themselves appealing to consumers it doesn't mean thats what they are actually like as people.

I have no problem with companies like Nintendo or Disney because of their past history. I have problems with companies like L'Oreal who do vile experiments on animals just for cosmetics or companies like Walmart who buy from the very cheapest sources with horrific conditions for the workers.

In like... 2 ways.
GPU - 360
Disc - PS3
CPU - PS3
Games - Draw (Not at launch, 360 obv. was winning then but that is unfair.)
RAM - 360
Sound - 360
Online - 360

The RAM question is a tricky one as they both have near enough the same RAM although its split on PS3 between GPU and CPU. The extra 10MEG of fast video memory of the 360 is slightly reduced by the fact the PS3 has additional cache in a few places. Also all PS3's have hard drives although admittedly the new 12GB model now depletes this somewhat but many PS3 games have a mandatory hard drive install because up to the 12GB model all PS3's have hard drives which isn't true of the 360 which gives the ps3 a virtual memory advantage.

The online bit is also suspect. I don't subscribe to xbox live so have no online functionality for 360 games but have it for my PS3 so the free online feature is a huge advantage to me of the PS3, so you can understand I would have the PS3 as superior in this regard. If I'd have had xbox live for the 7 years of 360 ownership that would have been about £200 spent that I could have used elsewhere.

The main criticism of your list is sound though. Sound is far, far better on PS3. Its huge blu-ray discs means it can often have far more space dedicated to sound and the internal hardware is superior anyway supporting superior audio formats including 7.1. This is such a huge and comprehensive win for the ps3 that I don't understand why you would have put that. The PS3 is easily the king of consoles with regard sound. The xbox 360 never moved on from the original xbox, in fact many have argued the sound hardware in the original xbox is superior as its a dedicated sound chip where as the 360 splits audio between the cpu and a sis chipset. Admittedly the ps3 also uses the power of the cell for some audio processing but then the cell is ideal for that.

The reason the wii u is designed like it is with regard cpu and gpu is to enable wii compatibility and therefore make it an easy upgrade from the original wii. It's clear they want to keep the casual crowd but also make some in-roads into more hardcore gaming.

Wii compatibility will improve just like it did with the ps3's ps2 compatibility for the early models that had it.  The wii u system software seems to be a bit rushed currently but I'm sure it will be sorted and optimised over the coming months.

I do think Nintendo could have done better here. Really they should have been prepared better (they had plenty of time). I also think the wii u is a bit over-priced.

In the UK I think it should have been the basic pack with nintendoland for £199 and the premium pack should have been £250 with mario and nintendoland. I just feel the pricing was a little high all things considered especially in this time of recession.

You can only go so far by saying it has improved architecture and overall a more modern design. The reality is mhz/ghz speed is part of the formula on how you work out the speed of cpu's and its a big part too but certainly superior cpu architecture can make up the difference and surpass it.

However the reality is the wii u cpu in overall performance appears to be less than 360 and PS3. Some games have had cpu intensive features removed, particle effects, physics engines and other more cpu intensive bits. A common missing feature is 3D support which is available on 360 and PS3 versions of games but removed from wii u versions. 3D is cpu intensive.

Not forgetting developer reports that have stated they have had a few problems getting wii u versions of 360/ps3 games to run as well due to the cpu.

The other false hope is the gpgpu. It seems not one concrete bit of information has come out to support this and the gpu in the wii u doesn't appear to be very large or power hungry and is unlikely to feature much cpu support at all.

I've currently got 2 wii u games and no wii u console as my console hasn't been delivered yet despite being pre-ordered months ago. As it stands though I'm wondering if there will be an early price drop. I'm a big fan of Nintendo games but it just feels like the console is too expensive for what it is. I feel the pricing should have been £179.99 and £229.99 in the Uk. I don't believe the wii u is profitable after 1 game for Nintendo I really believe its very profitable without additional purchases and unless they are going to release the information to prove what they say I just can't believe it. There just isn't enough in the wii u to make it that expensive to make.

I really want a wii u but must admit Nintendo are seriously taking the p**s with their spec and pricing. I've been seen as Mr Negative I think around here because I predicted a low specification for the wii u that would be current gen performance not next gen and to be honest I realise now I've been a bit of an optimist. I set my target low and was hoping to be pleasantly surprised but its actually come in under the specification I was expecting. I don't have a problem with the spec as such because I love Nintendo games but the pricing is clearly ridiculous for what it is. It is a complete mystery to me why Nintendo didn't just make the wii u go just beyond current gen even if a marginal difference. I don't understand why they have produced a weaker console than those that have been on the market for 7 years.

I know it has its strengths and is superior for some parts of the specification but the weak cpu will prevent it running many 360 and PS3 games fully/properly.

Its really the pricing I have issue with though. It just doesn't merit it's retail price.

There is a chance the cpu uses dynamic frequency scaling. Later Power PC chips have this and it would aid cooling of the console which is very important considering its size. However the most important thing of all is the cpu speed quoted is 1.24ghz which is not a multiple of the original wii cpu speed which was 729mhz I think. So it seems highly likely the cpu has this to enable full compatibilty with wii games by scaling the frequency down to 729mhz. In which case its quite possible 1.24ghz is not the maximum cpu speed. I still think it will be around 1.8ghz a 50% increase on the stated speed. However its possible that Nintendo slowed the gpu from 600 to 550mhz and reduce cpu speed due to thermal issues.

Whatever its clearly current gen performance overall and is really Nintendo's entry into PS3/360 territory. I'm not convinced there is any serious cpu assistance in the gpu its too small and low power. However I feel the wii u is designed to maximise the performance of its low cost components and this will make up some of the gap with the 360 and PS3 which have some issues to maximising performance especially the ps3.

The wii u simply may not be able to replicate all games fully that are possible on 360 and PS3 but then the wii u has its own advantages with regard memory, optical drive and gpu plus of course the huge advantage of amazing Nintendo games.

Anyway hopefully we can have some realism about the wii u. It is a bit disppointing that Nintendo didn't make the wii u comfortably outperform the 360 and PS3 there is no getting around that but its still a far, far more powerful console than the wii and a huge generational jump from wii to wii u.

The 360 only has 10meg of ultra fast video memory and the ps3 doesn't even have that. The wii u has 32meg of ultra fast video memory, over 3x that of the 360. Ok main memory is a little slower but overall the wii u can still be more powerful for memory speed. The wii u still looks more powerful overall due to the 32 meg of video memory.

If the cpu is a bit weaker and it has 32 megabytes of very fast video memory it would probably be a waste for Nintendo to buy better memory for wii u.

This is in no way negative so far.

What we really want to know is the performance of the cpu in real terms especially compared to 360 and PS3 plus more details on gpu performance especially how it can assist the main cpu for certain tasks. Once we have this information we can start to form a true picture of potential wii u performance.

No surprises so far.

I'm currently playing Skyrim on ps3 and have also played it on my 360 and its amazing on both. The PS3 version is now pretty good. You need to delete all skyrim files of your ps3 except game saves and make sure you have downloaded the latest update and its fine.

My issue with the game is I've become a vampire and don't want to be and its hard to get rid of. I stupidly didn't get it cured in the first 3 days and now its harder to get rid of.

I'm going to become a werewolve I think and that should cure it and then cure that I guess.

I personally think skyrim is possible on wii u but it may be enhanced in some ways and cut back in others. The game is very cpu intensive so some effects may have to be turned off on wii u but in other ways the game could be massively improved due to extra memory and superior gpu. I don't think it would be an easy conversion. The issues with ps3 are really down to Bethedsa being useless at coding on ps3. Oblivion was done by a external developer for ps3 and was better than the 360 version but sadly Bethedsa did Skyrim ps3 themselves.

I would of thought if money has changed hands even if its just a deposit then there is a contract of sale and if thats what the customer was informed when putting the deposit down then it should be honoured. If no money has changed hands its a bit different.

I don't see why the OP should be criticised. He is happy to go with the sales contract originally agreed, its the store that is at fault. Clearly they made an assumption about what was included and mis-informed their customers. It's only reasonable the customer expects to get the goods as advertised. If you bothered to take this to the small claims court it would be an easy win for the OP if money has changed hands for a deposit.

I'm sure if anyone here bought a bluray player that said it came with 20 free blurays and it arrived without the free blurays they would be on the phone complaining about the missing blurays. When the retailer took the money a sales contract was formed which is as per the description they can't just say the 20 free blurays was a mistake or we ran out of the free blurays.

The guilty party here is game not x-SourApple-x

Your status as imbecile has been confirmed.

Madden on 360 and PS3 has a physics engine, physics engines are very cpu intensive. It has been removed from the wii u version.

This is a very simple thing to work out, its not complicated at all.

Why is ninja gaiden on wii u cpu intensive?



Do you even understand how games have different requirements for gpu and the cpu?

If you can not work this stuff out why do you even dare comment on threads?

You started these abusive comments in threads but you simply have no ammunition. Who are you writing comments for, other idiots like yourself?

You don't have to do much googling to see comments about the wii u cpu being a bit weak. Its not the end of the world most games don't fully utilise their cpu anyway. It certainly didn't stop me pre-ordering.

What is the point of lying to yourself and other people?

Why are you fighting the information that is being released from developers and other sources about the wii u cpu?

Why can't you act like a rational normal person and just debate comments back and forth without being abusive?