Cloud Windfoot Omega

I see mention of the  "throwing money for best version" in a way i see this as something that should be  illegal. Might as well be crippling their games on the other versions too! (though some companies i freelanced for DID do this)

it would be diffrent if they asked them or financed them to make use of a tech that only their system has to highlight it such as the wii u gamepad or kinect.

it makes me a sad developer too. and the problem (which makes me sad also) is that indies are TRYING but they just never are tight enough or have enough quality  to be those amazing games (or they try to be artsy...)  what we need is balance. We dont need interactive stories (well we do its just over saturation) we can have a story but dont make it overshadow the game

and you can have great art but dont put the art department in charge of the game, too many times do i see  artists getting top billing when the programers are what make a game accually playable as a game.

and it really is a trap, because they are focusing on graphics and story they end up with these sums which are outrageous. On the flipside they could be selling less titles (lets fae it  too many people buy based on how great a game looks visually) but will end up making more per dollar spent because they would not have spent %80 of the budget just on graphics. (which is why you see lots of sequels which use the same assets, to make up the money they spent on the first game)

but  you would need smaller teams, meaning less  cost to development, meaning more teams can be  put together, which means more projects which means more overall  dollars back per dollar spent!  which in the end means, you can spend the same ammount of money on multiple games and make  mope money per dollar on all of those games combined!

I think perhaps the only imrovements that could be made are analog shoulder triggers, battery life, and brighter screen.

what good would analog triggers be, since it only accepts digital trigger input

PROBLEMS WITH WII U

 

IF YOU BELIVE THAT YOU ALSO BELIEVE PAPER WITH PICTURES ON IT IS WEALTH LOL stop being a brain washed baby its ANTI NINTENDOISM 100% FACT

 

 

THE WIIU HARDWARE blar blar blar SHUT THE F**K UP ACT LIKE ADULT

 

cell did that stop MR developer NOOOOOOOOOOO

 

emotion engine did that stop MR developer NOOOOOOO

 

 gsunit ps2 did that stop the developer NOOOOOOO

 

XBOX 360 INLINE LONG STAGE DUMB CPU DID THAT NOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

ps3 non edram x360 with edram did that stop the developers NOOOOOOOOOOO

 

 

so now everythings a wiiu issue wenn the thing is darn easyto code WAKE UP SMELL COFFEE GET HEAD OUT OF CORNFLAKES

 

ITS INDUSTRY BS

could you stop "yelling" in every post?

Christ 3dude why do you keep ranting all the time with your ridiculous opinions. You spoil just about every thread with ridiculous statements that only you believe or other demented Nintendo fanboys?

 

Your comments simply have no connection with reality. Yes the wii u cpu setup is weak, this is widely reported and often seen in games that underperform in in wii u.

 

Yes cartoon graphics are much easier to do than real life graphics because real life is much more diverse with regard textures, lighting and how things should behave. wii was competitive although weak for cartoon graphics but truly abysmal compared to 360 and PS3 for realism. This is nothing surprising. With cartoon graphics you don't have the set rules you have to follow you can basically design graphics around what works best for a specific console. There are some terrifc cartoon graphics on 360 and PS3.

 

You keep writing as if there is some conspiracy against wii u and with no acceptance that the wii u simply is a weak console that struggles to outperform current gen and you write with such resentment towards other consoles and their games. 

 

As a wii u, 360 and ps3 owner I can see the wii u is underperforming compared to current gen models overall.

 

The wii u has failed commercially probably because its offering current gen performance at next gen prices.

 

The wii u uses a tiny amount of power and is built around a low cost fabrication process that is much more power hungry at 45nm than ps4/xbone at 28nm., its impressive such a console is competitive with 360/PS3 in performance on that basis. It's an incredibly cheap design, unfortunately its horribly backfired on Nintendo as the wii u has not sold like wii.

 

Hardly anything you write has any connection with real world performance of wii u and its real world performance of the wii u that is killing it at retail. It's like the wii u console in your mind and the actual wii u console released to the world are two different consoles.

Oh mighty master of  proof. Please explain how come  you are always pointing out excuses made by companies that  hardly even touched the wii u. Oh please show me how amazingly these games were coded to use all cores when they were not. Please show  how lack of load balancing and therefor using less than half the available  CPU power yet still running games that  somehow require a core that runs at double the clock because its so weak. I  grovel at how good you are at explaining and proving points. Lay this wicked believer to rest with more bs. *bow bow*

http://news.yahoo.co...-210519219.html

Blatent bias and misinformation

But when the Wii U came out, and it was selling far better than the vita, there was no news  to the negative about the vita on that. Hell  the vita, for a system that has been out so long, only Barely has sold more in total than the Wii U. Yet this.

They have made a addon for the gamepad to make it last longer, but not 80 hours long. Not too sure what makes the gamepad so battery hungry, it does what a regular tablet does but lasts a LOT shorter, 

most tablets  have a much bigger battry which takes up their bulk weight and are generally not replaceable.

Anything can be a gimmick if promoted as one, for example back in the N64 days, the Analog stick was a gimmick.

accually no, a gimmick has little to no use. Except to make something  stand out or look better. "Blast Processing" is a gimmick because it had little to no actual effect on games. But the gamepad has many possibilities that can be explored. Nintendo is atm putting out games that  dont work well with the idea of the pad or are competitive so giving the gamepad an advantage is a no no

Aww cute story! But seriously, nintendo should make a 3D mario that is for the older gamers.

why?

His auto-tuned voice bothers me.

 

Can't stand it, but I like his stuff.

Not worth hearing his crappy voice though.

thats not auto tune thats altered pitch

Jaguar is an x86 chip, meaning that it is generally the same architecture as the first x86-64 chips of 2006. Anything else would be incompatible with Windows and such unless Microsoft rewrote the os for that platform.

Espresso, while being based on the Power architecture, is under the full control of Nintendo which can tailor the chip to handle the exact workload that gaming requires. X86 on the other hand has to be more of a generic chip that handles anything from gaming to daemons/services to Microsoft Office, meaning that not all of it's processing abilities are directly usable for gaming.

Microsoft Office for Xbox One

You already said too much, WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE! 

I am Cloud.

actually things are getting kind of rough for silicon on insulator technology. We are reaching the physical limits of dennard scaling.

You cant scale to the molecular level with current material technology.

Thats why the ghz race ended, and we went multicore. And thanks to amdahls law, multicore also has a cap. We need more powerful individual cores again....

We need a new material technology to get back on track to the rate of improvement that was enjoyed when moores law was still in effect.

It will come.

Yeah  one they start wokring with graphene we will start  reaching  higher. But we would also start reaching the maximum possible,  probably wont start at 1 atmom thick off the bat with it though
 
 
Also i would like to note about DDR3 vs GDDR5. Not many people know this but, DDR3 when it first came out, even with its  much higher speeds  accually preformed  the same (sometimes with a unnotceable speedup) thanks to  the timings going up, sure the speed when up but thanks to all the timings going down so did the  ability to move small code changes  ihn a timly manner, which  luckily since the  timings were only small changes did not  cripple CPU's. Now Cpu's are designed to work wioth these slightly higher  timings, although its not perfect.
 
Basicly  by increasing the  speed of data, we lower timings also known as latancy. Higher speeds are great for moving large single packages of data, sure it would start slowly but since it is moving the  large data package, it would not really matter since it will be ending that much quicker.
 
 
Now comes in GDDR5 named for being used in graphic cards nearly exclusively.Great for moving textures around since they are gennerally the large files. But it comes at a price of high latancy that can cause hiccups crippleing cpu's and game mechanics. Unless the cpu has extensive changes to overcome the high latancy, i personally would go with DDR3 atm.  Sony just wants some numbers to flash in peoples faces.

It has nothing to do with losing money. Their silicon budgets for the internals of the consoles are a determinate factor for price point, they aim to make their money back some way, and the gaming market expanded by a factor of three last generation thanks to "casual gaming" so once the software library is up to snuff console makers will make their money back, except for Sony, they still haven't made their money back on PS3.

Diminishing returns isn't something that goes away because you don't believe in it. GPU makers put out high end cards for 1000s of dollars in some cases that have more shaders and more RAM than mainstream or budget cards, but all they can do is a few more frames or a higher benchmark score.

Similar to the CPU "add more GHz" then "add more cores" GPU makers are saying "add more shader cores" then "add more RAM" "wider memory bus". The problem is that more shader cores and more RAM aren't getting the same performance gains they used to, because as these systems get more complex and powerful, the graphics engines that run on them become more efficient and scalable. Meaning the engines can do more with less hardware, but having more hardware is no benefit to anyone.

Every generation would need to scale by a larger factor than the last. This generation would need to see about 100 times the last to see a  eyepopping diffrence, then the next would need 10 times that to top its last,  meaning about 1000 times its last. The next generations will be funny to see, thanks to the internet and its  infinant "wisdom"

3dude, you are a delusional fanboy who has no sense of reality.  The wii u's cpu architecture dates back to the last century and it was powerful then but things have moved on. The PS3 and 360 cpu's don't compare well to the wii u cpu on a mhz vs mhz basis but then both ps3 and 360 are running their cpu's at 3.2ghz not 1.25ghz and the ps3 has 2 threads and 7 support processors all running at 3.2ghz not 3 at 1.25ghz. The 360 has 6 threads at 3.2ghz in total not 3 at 1.25ghz. Clearly if the wii u cpu was at 3.2ghz then it would be a different story but its running at close to 1/3rd the speed with just 3 processes. Your view that somehow a very dated cpu x3 run at a very low speed is somehow a competitive cpu design in 2013 is totally unrealistic and only acceptable to the most demented of fanboys. 

 

The PS4 and xbox one have all the advantages of an even more modern gpu than wii u so their weak cpu performance still represents a huge increase over ps3, 360 and wii u in real terms and they are still at least 4x as powerful as wii u in integer performance and a huge massive increase in performance in other areas.

 

You need to look at what the wii u is achieving in performance. It is ridiculous to make your claims when the wii u is still getting beaten by 360 and PS3 in performance terms. There is no golden horizon to come when suddenly the wii u will outperform 360 and PS3 for all games and go on to challenge xbox one and ps4. The 360 and PS3 still have more cpu performance than wii u and where games need this the wii u will underperform. For gpu centric games the wii u will be able to make a small step ahead of ps3 and 360 but its a marginally increase. The wii u is using a 45nm process, Sony had already moved to 40nm for the rsx sometime before the wii u was released. Everything we know about the wii u including developer leaks like the metro developer stating the wii u has a 'horrible slow cpu', performance, power consumption, fabrication process, x-ray image examination supports the view that the wii u performs to current gen performance.

 

Surely you realise its utterly moronic to create a fantasy image of the wii u technically that has zero connection with the reality of how wii u games are performing. It's also pointless attacking me when the information I'm posting is widely available from a huge number of sources where as the 'wii u is actually very powerful' articles are strangely absent on the internet.

way to put the blinders on dude.  Like the  architecture  (which is NOT 100 years old) has just been in idle for a decade and a half. But then again.... the new xbox and ps3 are using  architecture  traced back to the k9 which is also a decade and a half old. Just brcause something is based on older architecture does not make it the same, limited to, or less powerful than newer architectures.