Wii U a mistake
This topic is locked from further discussion.
I cant wait for the Wii U. Nintendo knows what they are doing. They innovate gaming. They take the next step and everyone else follows and tries to do it better. I can see the PS Vita being adapted to be a controller for a PS3. and you can still use the Wiimote/nunchuck with the Wii U. a game like SMG2 is still going to need it. Im sure that if a FPS comes out, it will have multiple control options.da_chub
Nintendo does not innovate all the time. The gamecube was not innovative in any way other than having the ability to connect with GBA on some games. I am not bashing Nintendo, but saying that the company always innovates is false. The 3DS is not innovative. 3D is nothing new.
I think its kind of cool...I mean I was playing arkham city on PS3 and I was thinking about what the Wii U version will be like..It would be cool to just have joker rndomly appear on your controller screen or use some of batman other gadgets with the screen.
Also the screen will take away the need to have all your status/HUB off the screen.
It'll be down to the developers and how they use the WiiU that will determine if it's a mistake or not. As the WiiU is compatable with Wii motion plus it is highly likely that some developers (if not most) will use it in some way.
It's best to wait in judging it untill after we see how developers decide to use what they have on offer. Judging it now, before we've seen anything, isn't fair to Nintendo or other developers.
Now that skyward sword has been reviewed and the control system using the Wiimote and nunchuk to its potential been proven (I've been a fan since day one try playing black ops on wiimote/nunchuk then go back to dual analog to prove a point) I can't help but think that the new Wii U controller that replaces the wiimote/nunchuk as the DEFAULT/PRIMARY CONTROL METHOD is a big mistake!!! What i want to know is that Nintendo invented the wiimote/nunchuk as an alternative to the now dated (LAST GEN IMO) dual analog controller for a good reason and we all responded. BUT now they are taking it away and giving us dual analog(with a touch screen in the middle) is this reasoning the same madness that reacted to the now fading 3D fad but the TABLET in this case? I say stick with the wiimote but spend the extra on a faster CPU/GFX chip.Pantburster2
they are not taking it away because the wii moteplus and nunchuk are also primary controllers on the wiiu. it just depends on the game for it to choose if it is going to use the tablet or the wiimote.
one thing they could do is make every game on the wiiu utilize the wii motion plus, unlike this gen with the wii where it was 90% waggling the whole time.
[QUOTE="Pantburster2"] Now that skyward sword has been reviewed and the control system using the Wiimote and nunchuk to its potential been proven (I've been a fan since day one try playing black ops on wiimote/nunchuk then go back to dual analog to prove a point) I can't help but think that the new Wii U controller that replaces the wiimote/nunchuk as the DEFAULT/PRIMARY CONTROL METHOD is a big mistake!!! What i want to know is that Nintendo invented the wiimote/nunchuk as an alternative to the now dated (LAST GEN IMO) dual analog controller for a good reason and we all responded. BUT now they are taking it away and giving us dual analog(with a touch screen in the middle) is this reasoning the same madness that reacted to the now fading 3D fad but the TABLET in this case? I say stick with the wiimote but spend the extra on a faster CPU/GFX chip.almossbb
they are not taking it away because the wii moteplus and nunchuk are also primary controllers on the wiiu. it just depends on the game for it to choose if it is going to use the tablet or the wiimote.
one thing they could do is make every game on the wiiu utilize the wii motion plus, unlike this gen with the wii where it was 90% waggling the whole time.
They are doing that. Wii U will not support the original remote so now Developers will have to use Wii Motion Plus if they want to use the Wii Remote method of control instead of having Waggle since Motion Plus would be the standard when it comes to Wii Remote control for the Wii U.But I think the Wii Remote Plus will mainly be used in Multiplayer games or some games the developer wants to use it in.
They're not taking away anything with the Wii U. In fact, the Wii U supports the wiimote and nunchuck for wii U games. It's up to the developers which control scheme they want to use. Crystal-Rush
By not making the Wiimote/nunchuk the default/primary controller they are killing it off checkout the poor ammount of six axis games on PS3. Do you really think developers are gonna fanny around with WiiU controls when developing for all three next gen formats? no way dude! consider this the end of the Wiimote :-( back to last gen controls for nintendo fans!
I agree.
The wiiu may be backwards compatible with the wiimote, but anyone who thinks the wiimote will ever see any use outside of party games is fooling themselves. Unless a wiimote plus comes in the box with the wiiu, developers are not going to support a non-standard controller. They are going to just port their PS3/360 games with the same controls an tack on some touch-screen crap. Developers are super lazy and publishers are super stingy and they are not going to support a radically different control set-up that 100% of their market may not have. Hell, the wii was BC with the GC controller...and like 5 games in the wii's whole life had support for it.
Look at games like Skyward Sword. There's no onther way to play that game. Period. You need a wiimote. That's why it's great. Its a game built for the wiimote, not some game that had traditional controls and got converted.
No developer is going to focus an entire project to a controller that's not standard. Developers have had 5 years to make great stuff with the wiimote, and a whole year to make great stuff with the wiimote plus. They haven't started now, why would they start with a new console with a smaller user-base that has a different controller as standard?
I agree.
The wiiu may be backwards compatible with the wiimote, but anyone who thinks the wiimote will ever see any use outside of party games is fooling themselves. Unless a wiimote plus comes in the box with the wiiu, developers are not going to support a non-standard controller. They are going to just port their PS3/360 games with the same controls an tack on some touch-screen crap. Developers are super lazy and publishers are super stingy and they are not going to support a radically different control set-up that 100% of their market may not have. Hell, the wii was BC with the GC controller...and like 5 games in the wii's whole life had support for it.
Look at games like Skyward Sword. There's no onther way to play that game. Period. You need a wiimote. That's why it's great. Its a game built for the wiimote, not some game that had traditional controls and got converted.
No developer is going to focus an entire project to a controller that's not standard. Developers have had 5 years to make great stuff with the wiimote, and a whole year to make great stuff with the wiimote plus. They haven't started now, why would they start with a new console with a smaller user-base that has a different controller as standard?
goblaa
OK, but once developers build the routines to read the wiimote+ it isn't something that just gets "tacked on." For example, I would say that the bounding box ideas for the IR pointer based FPS's are very much standardised now. The smoothest implementation of which was on RS2 (an m+ game).
Because Nintendo will have a more traditional controller it will be more likely that multiplat games will come out for the Wii U. However, when you throw in the Playstation Move and Motion + controllers, developers have two platforms where motions of a hand held device can be translated into gameplay. That should only make it more likely that motion controls are included in gameplay. The only motion control that I see having less support will be Kinect. I can't see multiplats giving much support to it.
Enough with these doubt topics. We know absolutely nothing about the Wii U besides the fact that its going to support all Wii accossories as well as games and that it will have a nearly if not completely HD streaming touch screen controller and that most western devs seem to like it. Hold these doubt topics back until we atleast know some more about the system.
[QUOTE="goblaa"]
I agree.
The wiiu may be backwards compatible with the wiimote, but anyone who thinks the wiimote will ever see any use outside of party games is fooling themselves. Unless a wiimote plus comes in the box with the wiiu, developers are not going to support a non-standard controller. They are going to just port their PS3/360 games with the same controls an tack on some touch-screen crap. Developers are super lazy and publishers are super stingy and they are not going to support a radically different control set-up that 100% of their market may not have. Hell, the wii was BC with the GC controller...and like 5 games in the wii's whole life had support for it.
Look at games like Skyward Sword. There's no onther way to play that game. Period. You need a wiimote. That's why it's great. Its a game built for the wiimote, not some game that had traditional controls and got converted.
No developer is going to focus an entire project to a controller that's not standard. Developers have had 5 years to make great stuff with the wiimote, and a whole year to make great stuff with the wiimote plus. They haven't started now, why would they start with a new console with a smaller user-base that has a different controller as standard?
mrfokken
OK, but once developers build the routines to read the wiimote+ it isn't something that just gets "tacked on." For example, I would say that the bounding box ideas for the IR pointer based FPS's are very much standardised now. The smoothest implementation of which was on RS2 (an m+ game).
Because Nintendo will have a more traditional controller it will be more likely that multiplat games will come out for the Wii U. However, when you throw in the Playstation Move and Motion + controllers, developers have two platforms where motions of a hand held device can be translated into gameplay. That should only make it more likely that motion controls are included in gameplay. The only motion control that I see having less support will be Kinect. I can't see multiplats giving much support to it.
This ^^ But with one slight correction. Developers don't need to develope routines to recognise motion for the remote, MotionPlus, the nunchuck or Move - AILive's middleware, LiveMove2, basically writes the code for them as soon as a motion is recorded. It takes very little effort to develope motion controlled gaming for the PS3 and Wii. As for the OP, you don't need to worry about the CPU and GPU...going by what we've had confirmed by IBM and AMD the U is going to be 4 or 5 times more powerful than the PS3 and 360.[QUOTE="mrfokken"][QUOTE="goblaa"]
I agree.
The wiiu may be backwards compatible with the wiimote, but anyone who thinks the wiimote will ever see any use outside of party games is fooling themselves. Unless a wiimote plus comes in the box with the wiiu, developers are not going to support a non-standard controller. They are going to just port their PS3/360 games with the same controls an tack on some touch-screen crap. Developers are super lazy and publishers are super stingy and they are not going to support a radically different control set-up that 100% of their market may not have. Hell, the wii was BC with the GC controller...and like 5 games in the wii's whole life had support for it.
Look at games like Skyward Sword. There's no onther way to play that game. Period. You need a wiimote. That's why it's great. Its a game built for the wiimote, not some game that had traditional controls and got converted.
No developer is going to focus an entire project to a controller that's not standard. Developers have had 5 years to make great stuff with the wiimote, and a whole year to make great stuff with the wiimote plus. They haven't started now, why would they start with a new console with a smaller user-base that has a different controller as standard?
thesnowdog2005
OK, but once developers build the routines to read the wiimote+ it isn't something that just gets "tacked on." For example, I would say that the bounding box ideas for the IR pointer based FPS's are very much standardised now. The smoothest implementation of which was on RS2 (an m+ game).
Because Nintendo will have a more traditional controller it will be more likely that multiplat games will come out for the Wii U. However, when you throw in the Playstation Move and Motion + controllers, developers have two platforms where motions of a hand held device can be translated into gameplay. That should only make it more likely that motion controls are included in gameplay. The only motion control that I see having less support will be Kinect. I can't see multiplats giving much support to it.
This ^^ But with one slight correction. Developers don't need to develope routines to recognise motion for the remote, MotionPlus, the nunchuck or Move - AILive's middleware, LiveMove2, basically writes the code for them as soon as a motion is recorded. It takes very little effort to develope motion controlled gaming for the PS3 and Wii. As for the OP, you don't need to worry about the CPU and GPU...going by what we've had confirmed by IBM and AMD the U is going to be 4 or 5 times more powerful than the PS3 and 360.So if its so easy why do only a few get move support? maybe it is because it is not the default control scheme as i have previously pointed out!!!
This ^^ But with one slight correction. Developers don't need to develope routines to recognise motion for the remote, MotionPlus, the nunchuck or Move - AILive's middleware, LiveMove2, basically writes the code for them as soon as a motion is recorded. It takes very little effort to develope motion controlled gaming for the PS3 and Wii. As for the OP, you don't need to worry about the CPU and GPU...going by what we've had confirmed by IBM and AMD the U is going to be 4 or 5 times more powerful than the PS3 and 360.[QUOTE="thesnowdog2005"][QUOTE="mrfokken"]
OK, but once developers build the routines to read the wiimote+ it isn't something that just gets "tacked on." For example, I would say that the bounding box ideas for the IR pointer based FPS's are very much standardised now. The smoothest implementation of which was on RS2 (an m+ game).
Because Nintendo will have a more traditional controller it will be more likely that multiplat games will come out for the Wii U. However, when you throw in the Playstation Move and Motion + controllers, developers have two platforms where motions of a hand held device can be translated into gameplay. That should only make it more likely that motion controls are included in gameplay. The only motion control that I see having less support will be Kinect. I can't see multiplats giving much support to it.
Pantburster2
So if its so easy why do only a few get move support? maybe it is because it is not the default control scheme as i have previously pointed out!!!
1. Most games take years to develop. The move is still a new controller.
2. My point was that future games have more chance for motion controls since, after Wii U is released, both Sony and Nintendo will have motion controls that can serve the same purpose. This has not been the case so far (since Nintendo didn't have an HD system and Sony didn't have motion controls), but seems likely for the future.
[QUOTE="almossbb"]
[QUOTE="Pantburster2"] Now that skyward sword has been reviewed and the control system using the Wiimote and nunchuk to its potential been proven (I've been a fan since day one try playing black ops on wiimote/nunchuk then go back to dual analog to prove a point) I can't help but think that the new Wii U controller that replaces the wiimote/nunchuk as the DEFAULT/PRIMARY CONTROL METHOD is a big mistake!!! What i want to know is that Nintendo invented the wiimote/nunchuk as an alternative to the now dated (LAST GEN IMO) dual analog controller for a good reason and we all responded. BUT now they are taking it away and giving us dual analog(with a touch screen in the middle) is this reasoning the same madness that reacted to the now fading 3D fad but the TABLET in this case? I say stick with the wiimote but spend the extra on a faster CPU/GFX chip.Nintendo_Ownes7
they are not taking it away because the wii moteplus and nunchuk are also primary controllers on the wiiu. it just depends on the game for it to choose if it is going to use the tablet or the wiimote.
one thing they could do is make every game on the wiiu utilize the wii motion plus, unlike this gen with the wii where it was 90% waggling the whole time.
They are doing that. Wii U will not support the original remote so now Developers will have to use Wii Motion Plus if they want to use the Wii Remote method of control instead of having Waggle since Motion Plus would be the standard when it comes to Wii Remote control for the Wii U.But I think the Wii Remote Plus will mainly be used in Multiplayer games or some games the developer wants to use it in.
well thats somewhat of a relief. but didnt they say only 1 tablet per system? in that case any multiplayer game will have to rely on the using the wiimotes, just like you said of course. im interested to see how it turns out, but im also scared/confused with how it might turn out. if nintendo revolutionized gaming with the wii mote, and then the next gen they went back to (almost) standard controls then it would be a waste.
They're not taking away anything with the Wii U. In fact, the Wii U supports the wiimote and nunchuck for wii U games. It's up to the developers which control scheme they want to use. Crystal-RushNot confirmed, unless they're in the box they won't be utilized by devs.
[QUOTE="Crystal-Rush"]They're not taking away anything with the Wii U. In fact, the Wii U supports the wiimote and nunchuck for wii U games. It's up to the developers which control scheme they want to use. meetroid8Not confirmed, unless they're in the box they won't be utilized by devs.
You know this as a fact?
Edit: it has been confirmed that the WiiU will be compatable with Wiimotion Plus.
Not confirmed, unless they're in the box they won't be utilized by devs.[QUOTE="meetroid8"][QUOTE="Crystal-Rush"]They're not taking away anything with the Wii U. In fact, the Wii U supports the wiimote and nunchuck for wii U games. It's up to the developers which control scheme they want to use. KnightSkull
You know this as a fact?
Edit: it has been confirmed that the WiiU will be compatable with Wiimotion Plus.
Yes, I wasn't clear with my first post. I was referring to the "It will be up to devs to decide whether or not use it" part. Admittedly, "not confirmed" doesn't make alot of sense there.
Yeah, let's take a step backwards in time and use a more limited controller with less possibilities. /sarcasm The Wii remote is far superior to a dual analog controller in almost every way. It is far more accurate and adds a new element to games that could be amazing if utilized correctly. It is confusing to me how anyone could prefer dual analogs over the Wii remote.I'm glad Nintendo has a more traditional controller for the Wii U. Hopefully we'll see a move away from this motion-control nonsense. IMO, a regular, old-fashioned controller beats waving a Wii Remote around any day.
MathMattS
[QUOTE="MathMattS"]Yeah, let's take a step backwards in time and use a more limited controller with less possibilities. /sarcasm The Wii remote is far superior to a dual analog controller in almost every way. It is far more accurate and adds a new element to games that could be amazing if utilized correctly. It is confusing to me how anyone could prefer dual analogs over the Wii remote.I'm glad Nintendo has a more traditional controller for the Wii U. Hopefully we'll see a move away from this motion-control nonsense. IMO, a regular, old-fashioned controller beats waving a Wii Remote around any day.
SF_KiLLaMaN
"if utilized correctly," that is the main problem with motion control. Most developers do not utilize in the right way. The Wiimote is not better for racers, fighters or action adventure games. RPG's do not play better with motion control either.
Yeah, let's take a step backwards in time and use a more limited controller with less possibilities. /sarcasm The Wii remote is far superior to a dual analog controller in almost every way. It is far more accurate and adds a new element to games that could be amazing if utilized correctly. It is confusing to me how anyone could prefer dual analogs over the Wii remote.[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"][QUOTE="MathMattS"]
I'm glad Nintendo has a more traditional controller for the Wii U. Hopefully we'll see a move away from this motion-control nonsense. IMO, a regular, old-fashioned controller beats waving a Wii Remote around any day.
gamenerd15
"if utilized correctly," that is the main problem with motion control. Most developers do not utilize in the right way. The Wiimote is not better for racers, fighters or action adventure games. RPG's do not play better with motion control either.
How do you figure that RPGs and action adventure games are worse on the Wii remote?I'd say there's a pretty good chance we'll get a Wii Remote Plus included with the system. They can't cost much money to produce anymore. The Wii Remote will probably be used like Move or Kinect or for games that are better played NES style. I'm sad about motion control being relegated to an optional control scheme, but I'm also pretty excited about the new controller. I always enjoy things like that because they make gaming feel new again.I agree.
The wiiu may be backwards compatible with the wiimote, but anyone who thinks the wiimote will ever see any use outside of party games is fooling themselves. Unless a wiimote plus comes in the box with the wiiu, developers are not going to support a non-standard controller. They are going to just port their PS3/360 games with the same controls an tack on some touch-screen crap. Developers are super lazy and publishers are super stingy and they are not going to support a radically different control set-up that 100% of their market may not have. Hell, the wii was BC with the GC controller...and like 5 games in the wii's whole life had support for it.
Look at games like Skyward Sword. There's no onther way to play that game. Period. You need a wiimote. That's why it's great. Its a game built for the wiimote, not some game that had traditional controls and got converted.
No developer is going to focus an entire project to a controller that's not standard. Developers have had 5 years to make great stuff with the wiimote, and a whole year to make great stuff with the wiimote plus. They haven't started now, why would they start with a new console with a smaller user-base that has a different controller as standard?
goblaa
I posted this post and i stand by my point. What i really want to say above all else is...
FFS NINTENDO WOULD IT OF HURT TO JUST BEEF UP THE MACHINE AND KEEP THE MOTION PLUS?
I agree.
The wiiu may be backwards compatible with the wiimote, but anyone who thinks the wiimote will ever see any use outside of party games is fooling themselves. Unless a wiimote plus comes in the box with the wiiu, developers are not going to support a non-standard controller. They are going to just port their PS3/360 games with the same controls an tack on some touch-screen crap. Developers are super lazy and publishers are super stingy and they are not going to support a radically different control set-up that 100% of their market may not have. Hell, the wii was BC with the GC controller...and like 5 games in the wii's whole life had support for it.
Look at games like Skyward Sword. There's no onther way to play that game. Period. You need a wiimote. That's why it's great. Its a game built for the wiimote, not some game that had traditional controls and got converted.
No developer is going to focus an entire project to a controller that's not standard. Developers have had 5 years to make great stuff with the wiimote, and a whole year to make great stuff with the wiimote plus. They haven't started now, why would they start with a new console with a smaller user-base that has a different controller as standard?
goblaa
Truer words have never been spoken. A large number of developers weren't too excited about developing games around the Wii Remote to begin with, and there have been far too few games outside of Nintendo's first party efforts that actually make decent use of the controller. At one point developers just made the excuse of the Wii Remote not being accurate enough to their liking, but even since MotionPlus and the other motion controlled options out there, we really haven't seen anything that wasn't done by the Wii's first year lineup. To think that developers are suddenly going to become as interested in developing motion controlled games with a system where more conventional controls will be the primary form of gameplay is beyond wishful thinking.
Heck, with the way Nintendo has been developing Wii games of late, focusing on mainly the Wii's NES style controls for a number of key games, I doubt that even they will focus on Wii Remote compatible games that much, unless it becomes an absolute necessity to attract many Wii owners to the Wii U. Afterall, it wouldn't be the first time that even Nintendo has introduced a feature/accessory to a system and hardly used it after the first year or so (if that much).
The machine doesn't need beefing up. It's going to be 4 or 5 times more powerful than the PS3 and 360...and you'll probably find that the PS4 and 720 will be in the same sort of ballpark in terms of power. Next gen is going to be more traditional, this gen has confused a great deal of people due to the 360 being the only one out of the three being a traditional 5 times more powerful than the previous gen machine. These confused people are either new to gaming this gen or people with very short memories.I posted this post and i stand by my point. What i really want to say above all else is...
FFS NINTENDO WOULD IT OF HURT TO JUST BEEF UP THE MACHINE AND KEEP THE MOTION PLUS?
Pantburster2
[QUOTE="Pantburster2"]The machine doesn't need beefing up. It's going to be 4 or 5 times more powerful than the PS3 and 360...and you'll probably find that the PS4 and 720 will be in the same sort of ballpark in terms of power. Next gen is going to be more traditional, this gen has confused a great deal of people due to the 360 being the only one out of the three being a traditional 5 times more powerful than the previous gen machine. These confused people are either new to gaming this gen or people with very short memories. lolwut? The PS3 is more powerful than the 360. The Xbox was more powerful than the PS2. How is the 360 the only one 5 times as powerful as their predecessor? Also, the Wii U isn't going to be even 2x more powerful than the 360 and PS3. It will be behind yet again next gen.I posted this post and i stand by my point. What i really want to say above all else is...
FFS NINTENDO WOULD IT OF HURT TO JUST BEEF UP THE MACHINE AND KEEP THE MOTION PLUS?
thesnowdog2005
[QUOTE="thesnowdog2005"][QUOTE="Pantburster2"]The machine doesn't need beefing up. It's going to be 4 or 5 times more powerful than the PS3 and 360...and you'll probably find that the PS4 and 720 will be in the same sort of ballpark in terms of power. Next gen is going to be more traditional, this gen has confused a great deal of people due to the 360 being the only one out of the three being a traditional 5 times more powerful than the previous gen machine. These confused people are either new to gaming this gen or people with very short memories. lolwut? The PS3 is more powerful than the 360. The Xbox was more powerful than the PS2. How is the 360 the only one 5 times as powerful as their predecessor? Also, the Wii U isn't going to be even 2x more powerful than the 360 and PS3. It will be behind yet again next gen. You obviously aren't clued up on console hardware mate. The 360 is around 5 times more powerful than the Xbox. This is a traditional leap in power from one generation to the next. The PS3 is a nontraditional 10 times more powerful than the PS2 and the Wii is a nontraditional 1.5-2 times more powerful than the Gamecube. As far as the U goes compared to the PS3 and 360 you have to take into account the aging hardware inside the PS3 and 360 and what we've had confirmed by IBM and AMD regarding the U's CPU and GPU. IBM have confirmed that the CPU is Power7-based, the most powerful CPU family on the planet. Even if IBM and Nintendo decide on a CPU underclocked to 2.5GHz and only give developers 3 usable cores (and a quad core is more likely) you're going to have 4 SMTs per core with at least 16Mb of eDRAM. It's going to run rings around the Cell and completely obliterate anything that the Xenon is capable of thanks to the Xenon only having 2 SMTs per core. Out of the two, the PS3 has the superior CPU. Out of the three the U CPU will walk all over the Cell and Xenon. We're talking about a modern high-end CPU compared to CPUs that are 6 and 7 years old. Next up is the GPU. AMD have confirmed that the GPU is a modern Radeon HD with multidisplay support, which means it's at least two generations ahead of the X1900 in the 360. The X1900 is basically a Radeon HD 2000 with 512Mb of GDDR3 shared with the system, a 128 bit bus and Shader Model 3.0 support. The 7800 GT in the PS3 has 256Mb of GDDR3, a 128 bit bus and Shader Model 3.0 support. Because the U GPU is a modern Radeon HD GPU we're looking at a 4000, 5000 or 6000 series with anywhere from 512Mb-1Gb of VRAM (and 1Gb is more likely), twice the bandwidth thanks to a 256 bit bus and the shader and processing advantages (including tesselation) that its Shader Model 4.1 support will provide. It's highly likely that the GPU is going to have four times as much VRAM at twice the bandwidth. Nintendo aren't producing another low cost and low-end console like they did this gen with the Wii, we're talking about high-end hardware here. There are going to be a great deal of people pleasantly (and some unpleasantly) surprised at what the U is going to be capable of. And it's very likely that the PS4 and 720 are going to be in the same sort of ballpark in terms of power too. Sony and Microsoft won't want to repeat the cock up that Sony made this gen with the PS3, both next gen machines will have a traditional leap in power, they'll both want to keep production and retail costs down...particularly when you consider that the U will have had a years head start in terms of marketshare and will be ripe for a price cut.I posted this post and i stand by my point. What i really want to say above all else is...
FFS NINTENDO WOULD IT OF HURT TO JUST BEEF UP THE MACHINE AND KEEP THE MOTION PLUS?
SF_KiLLaMaN
[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"][QUOTE="thesnowdog2005"] The machine doesn't need beefing up. It's going to be 4 or 5 times more powerful than the PS3 and 360...and you'll probably find that the PS4 and 720 will be in the same sort of ballpark in terms of power. Next gen is going to be more traditional, this gen has confused a great deal of people due to the 360 being the only one out of the three being a traditional 5 times more powerful than the previous gen machine. These confused people are either new to gaming this gen or people with very short memories.thesnowdog2005lolwut? The PS3 is more powerful than the 360. The Xbox was more powerful than the PS2. How is the 360 the only one 5 times as powerful as their predecessor? Also, the Wii U isn't going to be even 2x more powerful than the 360 and PS3. It will be behind yet again next gen. You obviously aren't clued up on console hardware mate. The 360 is around 5 times more powerful than the Xbox. This is a traditional leap in power from one generation to the next. The PS3 is a nontraditional 10 times more powerful than the PS2 and the Wii is a nontraditional 1.5-2 times more powerful than the Gamecube. As far as the U goes compared to the PS3 and 360 you have to take into account the aging hardware inside the PS3 and 360 and what we've had confirmed by IBM and AMD regarding the U's CPU and GPU. IBM have confirmed that the CPU is Power7-based, the most powerful CPU family on the planet. Even if IBM and Nintendo decide on a CPU underclocked to 2.5GHz and only give developers 3 usable cores (and a quad core is more likely) you're going to have 4 SMTs per core with at least 16Mb of eDRAM. It's going to run rings around the Cell and completely obliterate anything that the Xenon is capable of thanks to the Xenon only having 2 SMTs per core. Out of the two, the PS3 has the superior CPU. Out of the three the U CPU will walk all over the Cell and Xenon. We're talking about a modern high-end CPU compared to CPUs that are 6 and 7 years old. Next up is the GPU. AMD have confirmed that the GPU is a modern Radeon HD with multidisplay support, which means it's at least two generations ahead of the X1900 in the 360. The X1900 is basically a Radeon HD 2000 with 512Mb of GDDR3 shared with the system, a 128 bit bus and Shader Model 3.0 support. The 7800 GT in the PS3 has 256Mb of GDDR3, a 128 bit bus and Shader Model 3.0 support. Because the U GPU is a modern Radeon HD GPU we're looking at a 4000, 5000 or 6000 series with anywhere from 512Mb-1Gb of VRAM (and 1Gb is more likely), twice the bandwidth thanks to a 256 bit bus and the shader and processing advantages (including tesselation) that its Shader Model 4.1 support will provide. It's highly likely that the GPU is going to have four times as much VRAM at twice the bandwidth. Nintendo aren't producing another low cost and low-end console like they did this gen with the Wii, we're talking about high-end hardware here. There are going to be a great deal of people pleasantly (and some unpleasantly) surprised at what the U is going to be capable of. And it's very likely that the PS4 and 720 are going to be in the same sort of ballpark in terms of power too. Sony and Microsoft won't want to repeat the cock up that Sony made this gen with the PS3, both next gen machines will have a traditional leap in power, they'll both want to keep production and retail costs down...particularly when you consider that the U will have had a years head start in terms of marketshare and will be ripe for a price cut. You do realize how fast computer hardware moves right? In 2 years, which is most likely when the next 2 consoles will release, the hardware will be almost 3 times as powerful as it is when the Wii U releases. They would be crazy not to use it to have an advantage over the Wii U which would already be on the market.
FFS NINTENDO WOULD IT OF HURT TO JUST BEEF UP THE MACHINE Pantburster2
I think its going to be about as beefy as most people can afford.
AND KEEP THE MOTION PLUS?
Pantburster2
They did.
Motion controls are not going to go away. Yes, most developers did not use the Wii's motion controllers well. However, that generation is over and the situation is different. The original motion controllers couldn't do what devs wanted them to. Motion plus controllers can. The Wii couldn't do what some devs wanted it to. The Wii U can. Motion controls did not exist on other systems. Now they do.
Not every game is going to use motion controls, but, guess what, they don't need to. With the Wii U, motion controls can be used where they fit--not because they are the only option. I too love motion controls, but, let's be honest, there were a lot of Wii games that suffered because those motion controls were not the best choice.
Heck, with the way Nintendo has been developing Wii games of late, focusing on mainly the Wii's NES style controls for a number of key games, I doubt that even they will focus on Wii Remote compatible games that much, unless it becomes an absolute necessity to attract many Wii owners to the Wii U. Afterall, it wouldn't be the first time that even Nintendo has introduced a feature/accessory to a system and hardly used it after the first year or so (if that much).
Madmangamer364
While there has definitely been an emphasis on reviving classic NES games, I don't see how you would incorporate motion controls into those games more than what Nintendo did, and motion is a part of all those games. Skyward Sword will be using motion to the exclusion of other choices. According to IGN, IR aiming has been completely replaced with motion sensing, even on menus.
3rd party PS3 games are including Move support, and that is a peripheral that not only doesn't come with the system, but it costs twice what a M+ controller costs.
If Nintendo continues to create local multiplayer games, and there is no reason to think they won't, the motion controller will be the only option.
Smart phones and tablets have motion sensing built in.
Microsoft is spending a fortune promoting their motion sensing options.
Motion controls sold the Wii to the non-gamer market. Nintendo is not going to a abandon them.
Therefore, motion controls are not going away.
[QUOTE="gamenerd15"][QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"] Yeah, let's take a step backwards in time and use a more limited controller with less possibilities. /sarcasm The Wii remote is far superior to a dual analog controller in almost every way. It is far more accurate and adds a new element to games that could be amazing if utilized correctly. It is confusing to me how anyone could prefer dual analogs over the Wii remote.SF_KiLLaMaN
"if utilized correctly," that is the main problem with motion control. Most developers do not utilize in the right way. The Wiimote is not better for racers, fighters or action adventure games. RPG's do not play better with motion control either.
How do you figure that RPGs and action adventure games are worse on the Wii remote?Who said anything about being worse. Not being better does mean worse. How do you figure that all genre's work better with the motion controls. I have played adventure games on The Wii, and they are about the same as analog, so your statement about motion controls being better for everything is iffy.
How do you figure that RPGs and action adventure games are worse on the Wii remote?[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"][QUOTE="gamenerd15"]
"if utilized correctly," that is the main problem with motion control. Most developers do not utilize in the right way. The Wiimote is not better for racers, fighters or action adventure games. RPG's do not play better with motion control either.
gamenerd15
Who said anything about being worse. Not being better does mean worse. How do you figure that all genre's work better with the motion controls. I have played adventure games on The Wii, and they are about the same as analog, so your statement about motion controls being better for everything is iffy.
I have played adventure games on The Wii, and they are all way better than analog, so your statement about motion controls being the same or worse than everything is iffy. See how flimsy that argument is?How do you figure that RPGs and action adventure games are worse on the Wii remote?[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"][QUOTE="gamenerd15"]
"if utilized correctly," that is the main problem with motion control. Most developers do not utilize in the right way. The Wiimote is not better for racers, fighters or action adventure games. RPG's do not play better with motion control either.
gamenerd15
Who said anything about being worse. Not being better does mean worse. How do you figure that all genre's work better with the motion controls. I have played adventure games on The Wii, and they are about the same as analog, so your statement about motion controls being better for everything is iffy.
It sounded like you were saying that motion controls were worse for those genres. My apologies.[QUOTE="gamenerd15"][QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"] How do you figure that RPGs and action adventure games are worse on the Wii remote?meetroid8
Who said anything about being worse. Not being better does mean worse. How do you figure that all genre's work better with the motion controls. I have played adventure games on The Wii, and they are about the same as analog, so your statement about motion controls being better for everything is iffy.
I have played adventure games on The Wii, and they are all way better than analog, so your statement about motion controls being the same or worse than everything is iffy. See how flimsy that argument is?No one can offer proof of how one genre is better with the Wiimote as opposed to motion control. Mario Galaxy could have worked just as well with a standard controller minus collecting star bits and rolling Mario around inside the giant hamster ball. A lot of adventure games on wii require the nunchuck or can be played in NES style position, so explain how adventure games are better with motion.
The principle behind the wiiU is good. There is a question about whether consoles should just be an underpowered, affordable PC like the current HD twins. Nintendo is right to assume that you have to offer something else. The question is if their unique controllers are worth it.
Success is measured in more than just sales and in that way the wii was a failure. The controls are just not tight enough to give reliable feedback to the game. This doesn't mean that the wiiU is a mistake though. Tablet controls are a great way to separate yourself from PC with proven gameplay application from the DS and tablet gaming.
I like how the wiiU offers third parties a huge amount of choice. With the wii you had little choice but to use wiimote integration. With the wiiU you can make a game using normal controls with the tablet just doing maps or such, you can make the tablet central to the experience, you can make a wiimote centered game, or you can integrate all three elements somehow. So there is a huge difference in philosophy.
As for the processor, it is hard to really tell how good or bad it will be. At the very least it will be 1080p standard so it's a pretty huge leap up from the HD twins of this gen. My guess is that it will be able to accept multiplats from both this gen and the next gen. That would already be a huge improvement over the wii
It isn't that hard to tell how good the CPU and GPU are going to be after the official press statements from IBM and AMD. The U will be around 4 or 5 times more powerful than the PS3 and 360. Funnily enough Nintendo has followed the PS2 to PS3 model that Sony adopted by opting for a ridiculously powerful CPU rather than going the 360 route and putting more emphasis on the GPU power. Having a Power7-based CPU is a really big deal and surprised everyone. We were all expecting another PowerPC tbh. A great deal of people are underestimating the power that the U is going to have and I find it quite amusing that people are also overestimating the power that the PS4 and 720 are going to have. Sony and Microsoft aren't going to repeat the cock up that Sony made this gen with the PS3, they're going to want to keep production and retail costs down. The U will be the least powerful of the three next gen machines but they'll all be in the same sort of ball park...and can see the rabid fanboy rage now...next gen is going to be fun lolololThe principle behind the wiiU is good. There is a question about whether consoles should just be an underpowered, affordable PC like the current HD twins. Nintendo is right to assume that you have to offer something else. The question is if their unique controllers are worth it.
Success is measured in more than just sales and in that way the wii was a failure. The controls are just not tight enough to give reliable feedback to the game. This doesn't mean that the wiiU is a mistake though. Tablet controls are a great way to separate yourself from PC with proven gameplay application from the DS and tablet gaming.
I like how the wiiU offers third parties a huge amount of choice. With the wii you had little choice but to use wiimote integration. With the wiiU you can make a game using normal controls with the tablet just doing maps or such, you can make the tablet central to the experience, you can make a wiimote centered game, or you can integrate all three elements somehow. So there is a huge difference in philosophy.
As for the processor, it is hard to really tell how good or bad it will be. At the very least it will be 1080p standard so it's a pretty huge leap up from the HD twins of this gen. My guess is that it will be able to accept multiplats from both this gen and the next gen. That would already be a huge improvement over the wii
GunSmith1_basic
[QUOTE="da_chub"]I cant wait for the Wii U. Nintendo knows what they are doing. They innovate gaming. They take the next step and everyone else follows and tries to do it better. I can see the PS Vita being adapted to be a controller for a PS3. and you can still use the Wiimote/nunchuck with the Wii U. a game like SMG2 is still going to need it. Im sure that if a FPS comes out, it will have multiple control options.gamenerd15
Nintendo does not innovate all the time. The gamecube was not innovative in any way other than having the ability to connect with GBA on some games. I am not bashing Nintendo, but saying that the company always innovates is false. The 3DS is not innovative. 3D is nothing new.
yeah but the 3D graphics compatible with a touchscreen and able to play games,search the internet,take pictures,etc. IS in fact innovative.you see ALL the phone companies copying Nintendo's idea.i didn't see 1 single commercial for ANY 3D phone before the 3DS was announced.this says something about innovative.ALSO, Nintendo made the 3D Virtual Boy waaayy before that,so yeah.Ninetndo IS,in fact, innovative...Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment