matuuu2006

Nintyfan86, on 03 Jan 2014 - 1:12 PM, said:
That is the thing. Short term, you can generate an ROI by dumping a small investment into these games and putting them out there. Long term, the core audience will be somewhere else. Meanwhile, Nintendo's audience, which may not be exactly the same as the other platforms', is not growing in the way of interest for your products (forget about the quality of the product and look at the lack of advertising as a prime example).

My overall business philosophy coincides with common sense-do not waste resources unless you intend for something of value to occur.

With the Wii U, these third parties put their stuff out there at launch, and then gave up. Almost as if they expected an overnight turnaround for these genres on the platform. I am not sure Nintendo did their best to work with third parties, but the initial effort, from the outset, would have been a long term investment for publishers.  

This line of reasoning is why their overall about face makes so little sense to me, and why we have 5 man port teams in the first place.

The edram is currenty estimated to be either 35 GB/s or 70GB/s.  Im guessing 70GB/s because that would be in line with how they are using it.  Its enough for the frame buffer/z-buffer to never saturate bandwidth requirements, making bandwidth a non issue for the gpu.  This allows the main memory to act as a read only memory for the most part, meaning the 12.8GB/s to the DDR3 can be used for textures and assetts without sharing bandwidth with Z-buffer calls.  Whatever the real numbers are, it does not appear that the gpu is bandwidth starved.