Sorry, my sarcasm detector must be faulty. Other than Zelda (and uber-overrated Super Mario Galaxy) Nintendo has only made horrible half-assed money-grabbing gimmick-Wii games. They are like the Microsoft of video games. Only a Nintendo fanboy would deny that there are few worthy games available on the Wii
12-18 months is a long time. By then, the iOS will be '6' or even '7' and history tells us that its capabilities will be significantly enhanced.
I would suspect that what Nintendo is showing off today will be much superior by the time it comes out. However, whatever Apple and the developing community comes up with by then will be too.
The worst of it all is that one year after the Wii U (stupid, stupid name) ships, both Xbox 720 and PS4 will enter, guns blazing, with amazing graphics processing capabilities that'll kick the Wii U to the ground.
AND since there's already an iPad to do most of the "innovative" gameplay shown on the Wii U, and the games themselves don't have the "ooooh movement detection" gimmicky appeal the original Wiimote had, I'll bet Nintendo won't be able to sell boatloads of it like they did with the first Wii.
Don't worry about Nintendo. Its a very smart company. They one big mistake in console in the last 30 years.
maybe, but now they've jumped the shark. they needed a Wii HD in 2010 before Sony and MS caught up and passed them by with the Move and Kinect, not 2012. four years ago the Wii broke through to the family market, but now they are devolving back to just the grade school market. tweens, teens, and adults don't want a toy iPad, they want the real thing.
what's sad is that they could probably make more money taking their own 2d games like the first three Super Mario Bros etc and porting them to the ipad.
You know, I swear I saw a few dozen of these comment threads right around the time the Wii was announced. Ditto the DS.
And we all know those were both commercial failures that sunk Nintendo deeply into the red for years, right?
Oh. Wait. They were licenses to print money.
Oh well, haters are always going to hate.
hate? the Wii was innovative and fun when it first came out. no argument. but then Nintendo got arrogant due to that success and went stagnant, focusing mainly on adding more accessories. when instead it needed to upgrade the core system without delay.
as to the high-priced game business model that both Nintendo and Sony PSP milked for big profits for years at the expense of parents around the world, yes Apple iOS killed it for casual games. thank god.
"The biggest grab however, was the lush HD visuals that the console will supposedly ship with. Check out the video below and jump to 2:56 for what appears to be Link kicking a giant spider?s arse in full 1080p.
But here?s the thing? that footage? It?s from the PS3. So why in their big reveal has Nintendo palmed off visuals that don?t reflect their current console? The reason we?re given by Nintendo of America President Reggie Fils-Aime is that
(we?re) a year away from when the console will launch"
You guys do know that nintendo played around with screens in controllers BEFORE the ipad even existed right? Before the iphone or ipod touch even existed also right?
They played around with it on the gamecube with connecting the gameboy advance onto the gamecube and the current iawata asks they were playing with it internally even before then.
There was a spec sheet uploaded, which seemed to have plausible details:
But we know for a fact it doesn't have a SATA HDD - only optional USB HDD storage - and no Gamecube compatibility but it does have Wii compatibility. Not to mention the 25GB disc size not 50GB, although you'd think they'd allow it to play Blu-Ray movies.
Also, the processor has been described by IBM as based on the same design as the one they used in the Watson Jeopardy computer, which runs at ~3.5GHz though it has 8-cores and Wii U is said to have 3-cores like the XBox and based on a 45nm process.
The GPU was always said to be based off the RV770 AMD GPU, which is the Radeon 4870. The untrustworthy slide says 32nm process for the Wii GPU vs 55nm for the 4870 as well as a higher clock speed. It's plausible though and the PS3 did a similar thing but was based off the Geforce 7800GTX.
The 4870 scores 6500 in 3DMark and the 7800GTX scores 2235. If this was the GPU used, it would make the Wii U theoretically 3 times faster than the PS3. The following bird and Zelda demos run in real-time on the Wii U system in 1080p, very smooth, great lighting, no aliasing:
3 x faster than the PS3 wouldn't be hard as it's 5 year old hardware. Mobile GPUs now rival/exceed the PS3 GPU.
When you see the Zelda graphics, it's clear that we are reaching a point where raw performance is not going to matter that much. Even if Sony/Microsoft bring out a 10x leap a year or two later on, the 3x improvement over the Wii U wouldn't really make much of a difference and Nintendo are going to get some significant marketshare by being the fastest first, no doubt with some high-end exclusive titles.
When you see the Zelda graphics, it's clear that we are reaching a point where raw performance is not going to matter that much. Even if Sony/Microsoft bring out a 10x leap a year or two later on, the 3x improvement over the Wii U wouldn't really make much of a difference and Nintendo are going to get some significant marketshare by being the fastest first, no doubt with some high-end exclusive titles.
And let's be realistic, pushing the graphics 10X like the HD crowd demands would put Microsoft and Sony off once again. To accomplish this:
1. Sony would would have to invest millions if not a few billion into a chip that would be able to push more polygons on the screen without losing quality and that is cheaper to manufacture, and MS would have to find a chip of equal caliber. This in turn would force developers to acquire new hardware and would raise the prices of games on the market which already border on "ludicrous".
Or
2. Both would need to implement native support for Ray tracing, which would also drive costs through the roof.
GTA IV cost 100 Million to develop, EA said pushing new IP's on Wii was 7 million compared to the HD platforms which could go as high as 60 million.
Sony and MS would be shooting themselves in the foot if they overdo things, which is why I don't expect and am advocating against another "super-jump" in graphics. Nintendo was smart in waiting for the roadblock in the GPU department, because now it forces MS and Sony to differentiate not only from themselves but from Nintendo.
The new Minimum for Wii U games is expected to jump $20 up to $70 a game. Imagine what games would cost on the Super HD platforms.
I'm not sure where the term "Super HD" is coming from, but calling anything driven by an ATI 4870 or even Nvidia GTX 460 "Super HD", is... laughable.
Obviously, I'm a "PC gamer". "Next-gen" consoles need to be of an ATI 5870 1GB or better class of GPU to even warrant being called "Super HD" (whatever that means).
I don't see how these "Super HD" titles should then cause any increase in prices for games ~ developers are already targeting PC platforms with (usually) better graphics alongside the PS3 and Xbox360 titles.
As for Nintendo, I don't see them offering the "hardcore" titles like on PS3 and Xbox360, so, as excited as I am about a "next-gen" console, I'm not sure about this Nintendo thing until we get more information.
Keep in mind, the iPad 3 will probably easily match the PS3 in terms of horsepower.
AppleTV is one flick of the switch away from being a new gaming console. If Steve wants it, it will happen.
I don't see how these "Super HD" titles should then cause any increase in prices for games ~ developers are already targeting PC platforms with (usually) better graphics alongside the PS3 and Xbox360 titles.
As for Nintendo, I don't see them offering the "hardcore" titles like on PS3 and Xbox360, so, as excited as I am about a "next-gen" console, I'm not sure about this Nintendo thing until we get more information.
Keep in mind, the iPad 3 will probably easily match the PS3 in terms of horsepower.
AppleTV is one flick of the switch away from being a new gaming console. If Steve wants it, it will happen.
I use "Super HD" loosely as a term to define those who want another mega graphics jump.
A few things
1: If you have followed PC gaming for as long as you claim, you would know that almost every PC game in the last 5 or so years has been a cheap console port. The PC exclusives that were released in between such times never took advantage of newer hardware. The max GPU always signaled was a Geforce 9 series card, the minimum usually being signaled at a Geforce 6. Even now few developers have ventured into the GTX realm for highest performance.
2. Did you watch Nintendo's press confrerence or not? With such a statement I'm leaning on the latter.
3. The Ipad 3 in terms of mainstream gaming, will never grab the gaming market until:
It has games with depth.
iOS devs implement comfortable or proper tochscreen controls
or
Until flexible methods of play are allowed(AKA wireless controller, keyboard and mouse)
The Casual crowd(one that has a stronger say, but still has drawbacks) will purchase the Ipad 3 regardless of.
AppleTV is one flick of the switch away from being a new gaming console. If Steve wants it, it will happen.
+1
I'm sure gaming never was Steve plan, but like you said, Apple has right now everything in his sleeves to come and shake the gaming console industry. Apple could come out with a 99$ AppleTV w/ iPad 2 hardware in it and still make money, Nintendo, Sony and MS cannot compete at this price rang right now. The only puzzle piece missing right now is a good bluetooth controller for iOS devices.
I'm not sure where the term "Super HD" is coming from, but calling anything driven by an ATI 4870 or even Nvidia GTX 460 "Super HD", is... laughable.
I think he meant Wii = non-HD, PS3/360/Wii U = HD, PS4/720 = Super-HD. Whatever Sony/Microsoft do next will have to have something to set them apart.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008
As for Nintendo, I don't see them offering the "hardcore" titles like on PS3 and Xbox360, so, as excited as I am about a "next-gen" console, I'm not sure about this Nintendo thing until we get more information.
Some of the launch titles are:
Assassin?s Creed
Arkham City
Darksiders 2
Dirt
Metro: Last Light
Tekken
Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor?s Edge
The Metro games are about as hardcore as they come. I think the biggest hurdle in accepting Nintendo consoles as hardcore gaming machines is because games looked like this:
Comments
IThe controller has way more in common with the Nintendo DS (release date: 2004) than it does with the iPad (release date: 2010).
Not in the slightest. Have you seen the demos? The gestures, gyro use, all of them scream "iPad!"
I hope these games are fun. Good luck, Nintendo.
Sorry, my sarcasm detector must be faulty. Other than Zelda (and uber-overrated Super Mario Galaxy) Nintendo has only made horrible half-assed money-grabbing gimmick-Wii games. They are like the Microsoft of video games. Only a Nintendo fanboy would deny that there are few worthy games available on the Wii
12-18 months is a long time. By then, the iOS will be '6' or even '7' and history tells us that its capabilities will be significantly enhanced.
I would suspect that what Nintendo is showing off today will be much superior by the time it comes out. However, whatever Apple and the developing community comes up with by then will be too.
AND since there's already an iPad to do most of the "innovative" gameplay shown on the Wii U, and the games themselves don't have the "ooooh movement detection" gimmicky appeal the original Wiimote had, I'll bet Nintendo won't be able to sell boatloads of it like they did with the first Wii.
Don't worry about Nintendo. Its a very smart company. They one big mistake in console in the last 30 years.
maybe, but now they've jumped the shark. they needed a Wii HD in 2010 before Sony and MS caught up and passed them by with the Move and Kinect, not 2012. four years ago the Wii broke through to the family market, but now they are devolving back to just the grade school market. tweens, teens, and adults don't want a toy iPad, they want the real thing.
And we all know those were both commercial failures that sunk Nintendo deeply into the red for years, right?
Oh. Wait. They were licenses to print money.
Oh well, haters are always going to hate.
I hope these games are fun. Good luck, Nintendo.
what's sad is that they could probably make more money taking their own 2d games like the first three Super Mario Bros etc and porting them to the ipad.
You know, I swear I saw a few dozen of these comment threads right around the time the Wii was announced. Ditto the DS.
And we all know those were both commercial failures that sunk Nintendo deeply into the red for years, right?
Oh. Wait. They were licenses to print money.
Oh well, haters are always going to hate.
hate? the Wii was innovative and fun when it first came out. no argument. but then Nintendo got arrogant due to that success and went stagnant, focusing mainly on adding more accessories. when instead it needed to upgrade the core system without delay.
as to the high-priced game business model that both Nintendo and Sony PSP milked for big profits for years at the expense of parents around the world, yes Apple iOS killed it for casual games. thank god.
I was hoping for better graphics than Xbox360:
"The biggest grab however, was the lush HD visuals that the console will supposedly ship with. Check out the video below and jump to 2:56 for what appears to be Link kicking a giant spider?s arse in full 1080p.
But here?s the thing? that footage? It?s from the PS3. So why in their big reveal has Nintendo palmed off visuals that don?t reflect their current console? The reason we?re given by Nintendo of America President Reggie Fils-Aime is that
(we?re) a year away from when the console will launch"
http://www.ripten.com/2011/06/08/nin...s3xbox-images/
*sigh*
Behold ladies and gentlement, failing journalism
http://www.destructoid.com/e3-wii-u-...e-203237.phtml
http://www.joystiq.com/2011/06/08/wi...s3-pc-footage/
http://www.gamepro.com/article/news/...d-360-footage/
Had anyone actually done dugging up the statement in question was to this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAlqC-9HTm4
Nobody knows what the Console can actually do yet, quit yer whining.
They played around with it on the gamecube with connecting the gameboy advance onto the gamecube and the current iawata asks they were playing with it internally even before then.
So stop with this ipad stuff.
AMD GPU "Custom HD Radeon"
25GB proprietary disks
Wii game, controller and accessory support
NO Gamecube compatibility
http://www.destructoid.com/e3-wii-u-...y-203333.phtml
We've got some early specs
There was a spec sheet uploaded, which seemed to have plausible details:
But we know for a fact it doesn't have a SATA HDD - only optional USB HDD storage - and no Gamecube compatibility but it does have Wii compatibility. Not to mention the 25GB disc size not 50GB, although you'd think they'd allow it to play Blu-Ray movies.
Also, the processor has been described by IBM as based on the same design as the one they used in the Watson Jeopardy computer, which runs at ~3.5GHz though it has 8-cores and Wii U is said to have 3-cores like the XBox and based on a 45nm process.
The GPU was always said to be based off the RV770 AMD GPU, which is the Radeon 4870. The untrustworthy slide says 32nm process for the Wii GPU vs 55nm for the 4870 as well as a higher clock speed. It's plausible though and the PS3 did a similar thing but was based off the Geforce 7800GTX.
The 4870 scores 6500 in 3DMark and the 7800GTX scores 2235. If this was the GPU used, it would make the Wii U theoretically 3 times faster than the PS3. The following bird and Zelda demos run in real-time on the Wii U system in 1080p, very smooth, great lighting, no aliasing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcapRBQoMWk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arHNcSMXaBk
3 x faster than the PS3 wouldn't be hard as it's 5 year old hardware. Mobile GPUs now rival/exceed the PS3 GPU.
When you see the Zelda graphics, it's clear that we are reaching a point where raw performance is not going to matter that much. Even if Sony/Microsoft bring out a 10x leap a year or two later on, the 3x improvement over the Wii U wouldn't really make much of a difference and Nintendo are going to get some significant marketshare by being the fastest first, no doubt with some high-end exclusive titles.
When you see the Zelda graphics, it's clear that we are reaching a point where raw performance is not going to matter that much. Even if Sony/Microsoft bring out a 10x leap a year or two later on, the 3x improvement over the Wii U wouldn't really make much of a difference and Nintendo are going to get some significant marketshare by being the fastest first, no doubt with some high-end exclusive titles.
And let's be realistic, pushing the graphics 10X like the HD crowd demands would put Microsoft and Sony off once again. To accomplish this:
1. Sony would would have to invest millions if not a few billion into a chip that would be able to push more polygons on the screen without losing quality and that is cheaper to manufacture, and MS would have to find a chip of equal caliber. This in turn would force developers to acquire new hardware and would raise the prices of games on the market which already border on "ludicrous".
Or
2. Both would need to implement native support for Ray tracing, which would also drive costs through the roof.
GTA IV cost 100 Million to develop, EA said pushing new IP's on Wii was 7 million compared to the HD platforms which could go as high as 60 million.
Sony and MS would be shooting themselves in the foot if they overdo things, which is why I don't expect and am advocating against another "super-jump" in graphics. Nintendo was smart in waiting for the roadblock in the GPU department, because now it forces MS and Sony to differentiate not only from themselves but from Nintendo.
The new Minimum for Wii U games is expected to jump $20 up to $70 a game. Imagine what games would cost on the Super HD platforms.
Obviously, I'm a "PC gamer". "Next-gen" consoles need to be of an ATI 5870 1GB or better class of GPU to even warrant being called "Super HD" (whatever that means).
I don't see how these "Super HD" titles should then cause any increase in prices for games ~ developers are already targeting PC platforms with (usually) better graphics alongside the PS3 and Xbox360 titles.
As for Nintendo, I don't see them offering the "hardcore" titles like on PS3 and Xbox360, so, as excited as I am about a "next-gen" console, I'm not sure about this Nintendo thing until we get more information.
Keep in mind, the iPad 3 will probably easily match the PS3 in terms of horsepower.
AppleTV is one flick of the switch away from being a new gaming console. If Steve wants it, it will happen.
I don't see how these "Super HD" titles should then cause any increase in prices for games ~ developers are already targeting PC platforms with (usually) better graphics alongside the PS3 and Xbox360 titles.
As for Nintendo, I don't see them offering the "hardcore" titles like on PS3 and Xbox360, so, as excited as I am about a "next-gen" console, I'm not sure about this Nintendo thing until we get more information.
Keep in mind, the iPad 3 will probably easily match the PS3 in terms of horsepower.
AppleTV is one flick of the switch away from being a new gaming console. If Steve wants it, it will happen.
I use "Super HD" loosely as a term to define those who want another mega graphics jump.
A few things
1: If you have followed PC gaming for as long as you claim, you would know that almost every PC game in the last 5 or so years has been a cheap console port. The PC exclusives that were released in between such times never took advantage of newer hardware. The max GPU always signaled was a Geforce 9 series card, the minimum usually being signaled at a Geforce 6. Even now few developers have ventured into the GTX realm for highest performance.
2. Did you watch Nintendo's press confrerence or not? With such a statement I'm leaning on the latter.
3. The Ipad 3 in terms of mainstream gaming, will never grab the gaming market until:
It has games with depth.
iOS devs implement comfortable or proper tochscreen controls
or
Until flexible methods of play are allowed(AKA wireless controller, keyboard and mouse)
The Casual crowd(one that has a stronger say, but still has drawbacks) will purchase the Ipad 3 regardless of.
AppleTV is one flick of the switch away from being a new gaming console. If Steve wants it, it will happen.
+1
I'm sure gaming never was Steve plan, but like you said, Apple has right now everything in his sleeves to come and shake the gaming console industry. Apple could come out with a 99$ AppleTV w/ iPad 2 hardware in it and still make money, Nintendo, Sony and MS cannot compete at this price rang right now. The only puzzle piece missing right now is a good bluetooth controller for iOS devices.
I'm not sure where the term "Super HD" is coming from, but calling anything driven by an ATI 4870 or even Nvidia GTX 460 "Super HD", is... laughable.
I think he meant Wii = non-HD, PS3/360/Wii U = HD, PS4/720 = Super-HD. Whatever Sony/Microsoft do next will have to have something to set them apart.
As for Nintendo, I don't see them offering the "hardcore" titles like on PS3 and Xbox360, so, as excited as I am about a "next-gen" console, I'm not sure about this Nintendo thing until we get more information.
Some of the launch titles are:
Assassin?s Creed
Arkham City
Darksiders 2
Dirt
Metro: Last Light
Tekken
Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor?s Edge
The Metro games are about as hardcore as they come. I think the biggest hurdle in accepting Nintendo consoles as hardcore gaming machines is because games looked like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZUsfqo2xRA
When they look like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iJIdE3Kaqo
it won't be so bad. Nothing groundbreaking but at least not garbage.