Wii U

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

There can only be one basic feature? It's E3 and the premiere, why would they focus on the old when there's the brand shiny new?

[RockyRan]

There can only be one basic feature? It's E3 and the premiere, why would they focus on the old when there's the brand shiny new?

 

One of the most important basic features, yes. Not sure why I even have to argue this.

[FMW]

Well hang on - you seem to be judging the console based on the marketing at E3. Nintendo, in their 45 minute introduction, focused exclusively on the new control interface. Therefore you are passing judgement based on the controller and not on any of the other details we've since learned. That seems... odd. It's alright to get excited about features that aren't marketed heavily. I'm excited for the Wii U, but for reasons that are separate from the marketing.

 

I'm excited that I won't need to pay for extra controllers at all. I paid that for the Wii, and I don't need to again. This is good. This was not advertised heavily.

 

I'm excited for the potential creative application in hardcore single player games. This was not advertised in Nintendo's conference. They didn't show the Wii U Pad contributing anything special to their list of M rated franchises. However, I'm still excited about it (see my previous post).

 

I'm excited to see 3DS connectivity options. Nintendo has been toying with this since Pokemon Coliseum, and the results hit more often than they miss. We know they'll be using the tech in Smash Bros, so I'm sure it will crop up elsewhere also. This was not heavily advertised.

 

I'm excited to play games on the controller without the TV screen. Honestly, the controller screen is probably going to be higher quality than anything in my house (I don't own anything HD) so that will be a huge plus. Screen quality was not mentioned in the marketing.

 

That's why I look forward to this device. The fact that the E3 presser didn't cover this stuff doesn't make it less valid. So yeah, I'm basically with Faiblesse Des Sens on this one. There's more than one aspect to hardware, more than one feature set to be considered.

Edited June 15, 2011 by Frosted Mini-Wheats

[CorgiShinobi]

Reggie says the Wii U can support two of the new Wii U controllers. Kinda what I figured, but I think the point is that there's still research going into the capabilities of the thing.

 

IGN

[excel_excel]

Interesting! I'd say that's probably the max. I mean we also have the TV to use as well, as well as the 3DS in other cases.

[deanb]

I'm excited for the potential creative application in hardcore single player games. This was not advertised in Nintendo's conference. They didn't show the Wii U Pad contributing anything special to their list of M rated franchises. However, I'm still excited about it (see my previous post).

They're going to play as close as possible to a 360 pad/ Dualshock as the Wii U can deliver. That's the dominant control scheme. Given that fair chunk of muli-plats don't tend to map to the creative applications of kb/m well I can't see them putting too much effort into them making much use of the screen. And if the Wii U ends up with the same userbase as the Wii the M rated 3rd parties will dry up pretty fast.

 

 

I'm excited to play games on the controller without the TV screen. Honestly, the controller screen is probably going to be higher quality than anything in my house (I don't own anything HD) so that will be a huge plus. Screen quality was not mentioned in the marketing.

Nintendo haven't been too up front on any tech specifics, but it's guestimated to be around SD. It's a 6 inch screen, it would be quite expensive and pointless to be putting in a HD display.

 

This is the Wii U after all and I'd wager the apple won't fall far from the tree. If it's easy to port then you'll see some multi-plats running on it. But once the new consoles from MS n Sony hit the 3rd parties won't care much for it, and it'll be back to COD: Reflex and other spin-offs made by outsourced studios. It'll only be rubbing shoulders in terms of power for about 2 years.

 

Also the appeal of the console drops a fair bit when they show off this new controller, and ultimately most of your game time with the console is going to be with your old wiimotes like your old Wii. Considering the fact that it's most likely the controller that's going to make it expensive (as they've warned of) it's a bit of a sour point that the major cost of the console is going to be something you can't much use. It would be like if even the base 360 came with Kinect regardless and it only properly supports like 30 games. (kinect on top pushes 360 from £140 to £245, quite a bump)

Been able to do two slightly ups it's chances, though that would be something to have maybe been sure of when they came to E3 instead of being a bit unsure even among the heads of Nintendo. (Though this news is through Pachter, and everyone else seemed pretty adamant it would only support one and they'd never sell extras in store so maybe some extra confirmation needed on that)

[RockyRan]

Well hang on - you seem to be judging the console based on the marketing at E3. Nintendo, in their 45 minute introduction, focused exclusively on the new control interface. Therefore you are passing judgement based on the controller and not on any of the other details we've since learned. That seems... odd. It's alright to get excited about features that aren't marketed heavily. I'm excited for the Wii U, but for reasons that are separate from the marketing.

 

That's because I don't indulge in meaningless fantasies anymore. My opinion is formed solely on what I see. If Nintendo's conference was aimless, confusing, and muddy, and if further details separate from the conference don't instill confidence in the console's capabilities, my initial impression is not good. I'm not passing a FINAL judgement, mind you. I probably won't pass final judgement until I actually see the console for myself and spend a good amount of time on it, but I'm talking about these impressions I'm having right now and my feeling the console isn't doing what I think is supposed to. That's it.

 

I'm excited that I won't need to pay for extra controllers at all. I paid that for the Wii, and I don't need to again. This is good. This was not advertised heavily.

 

I'm excited for the potential creative application in hardcore single player games. This was not advertised in Nintendo's conference. They didn't show the Wii U Pad contributing anything special to their list of M rated franchises. However, I'm still excited about it (see my previous post).

 

I'm excited to see 3DS connectivity options. Nintendo has been toying with this since Pokemon Coliseum, and the results hit more often than they miss. We know they'll be using the tech in Smash Bros, so I'm sure it will crop up elsewhere also. This was not heavily advertised.

 

I'm excited to play games on the controller without the TV screen. Honestly, the controller screen is probably going to be higher quality than anything in my house (I don't own anything HD) so that will be a huge plus. Screen quality was not mentioned in the marketing.

 

That's why I look forward to this device. The fact that the E3 presser didn't cover this stuff doesn't make it less valid. So yeah, I'm basically with Faiblesse Des Sens on this one. There's more than one aspect to hardware, more than one feature set to be considered.

 

*sigh*

 

Again, indulging in fantasies is not something I do with Nintendo. I did with the Wii and was burned horribly by it. At this point I only go by what Nintendo's telling me, period. If they can't sell their newfangled console to me properly without me thinking it's horribly gimped, they've done something wrong. Most of your excitement seems to come just from hypotheticals about what COULD happen, and I know Nintendo all too well to assume that they'll all happen. I'm not going to be excited for potential, I'm going to get excited for cold, hard games sitting on the shelves that actually use the console in ways that they promised. Anything less than that is empty promises, and any fantasies I'd cook up will be childish daydreaming.

[Yantelope]

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2011-06-21-miyamoto-wii-u-may-not-be-more-powerful-than-current-gen

 

So it's looking pretty much set in stone that the Wii U will be about the same as the PS3 or Xbox. I'm struggling to see any way I'm going to go out and get a Wii U.

[excel_excel]

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2011-06-21-miyamoto-wii-u-may-not-be-more-powerful-than-current-gen

 

So it's looking pretty much set in stone that the Wii U will be about the same as the PS3 or Xbox. I'm struggling to see any way I'm going to go out and get a Wii U.

 

Ohhhh man. This ain't going to sit happy with a lot of people. Nintendo ain't doomed, the 3DS will take off as more software comes out, but man, its not looking good for Wii U right now. Nintendo better blow us away at E3 2012

[RockyRan]

Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto has revealed that cost considerations mean that the Wii U may not be significantly more powerful than either the 360 or the PS3 - instead insisting that a balance must be struck between price and performance.

 

This is the problem with a continued insistence to make large amounts of profit per console. I know that's how Nintendo rolls, but it sacrifices overall product quality.

 

I fail to see how 2006/2005 technology is anything but dirt cheap. They can most definitely make a console significantly more powerful than current generation and still be able to sell it at ~$250 with the Wii U tablet controller included. Or maybe NOT expect a ridiculous amount of profit per console. Miyamoto's talking about the "balance" between price and power as if it's something that's out of Nintendo's control, even though it isn't. And TBH, this isn't the first time Nintendo tries to bullshit us (remember the "We're not doing online in NSMBWii because the game already uses too much of the Wii's power" statement? Yeah, what idiot bought that reasoning?)

 

I'm quickly losing faith in Nintendo's ability to sustain a serious gaming console. If they don't watch where they're going Nintendo could very well have another GameCube in their hands.

Edited June 21, 2011 by RockyRan

[Yantelope]

What really did cause the failure of the Gamecube? I thought it was mainly just the PS2 having better games and DVD playback. Gamecube had comprable graphics, some of the games looked really good, but the first party support was staggeringly weak from Nintendo and 3rd party support never fully kicked in like they did for the xbox and PS2.

 

Honestly I think the Wii should have failed and only didn't because it became a fad, a virus as Cliffy B called it. Lightning rarely strikes twice and I don't see the Wii U sharing the same fad success that its predecessor had.

[RockyRan]

What really did cause the failure of the Gamecube? I thought it was mainly just the PS2 having better games and DVD playback. Gamecube had comprable graphics, some of the games looked really good, but the first party support was staggeringly weak from Nintendo and 3rd party support never fully kicked in like they did for the xbox and PS2.

 

Honestly I think the Wii should have failed and only didn't because it became a fad, a virus as Cliffy B called it. Lightning rarely strikes twice and I don't see the Wii U sharing the same fad success that its predecessor had.

 

To be perfectly honest, I don't know. There really WASN'T a reason why the GameCube failed, I guess it's just that everyone was too busy having a perpetual rave on the PS2.

 

One clear-cut mistake Nintendo made was the tiny GC discs. Back in the day I heard plenty of times how such-and-such PS2/Xbox game didn't come to the GameCube because of disc limitations. But still, I highly doubt that was THE reason.

 

My main point in bringing up the GameCube is that if Ninty's not careful they're going to put themselves into a GameCube-like position, in which no matter what they'll do they won't succeed, with mediocre (albeit still profitable) console sales and having the industry generally not give a shit about them. Wasn't so much a problem with the Wii because so many non-gamers loved it, but I maintain that the Wii's success will probably never be replicated. Nintendo at least somewhat seems to realize this, because they didn't focus so much on casual gaming with the Wii U but rather the "coolness" factor of the tablet controller and the purported 3rd party support.

 

At the same time I can't help but feel like they're not too sure what they're doing themselves. I mean, I realize the console is still in development, but their ambivalence in giving any real detail as well as a generally mixed approach as to who they're actually targeting doesn't give me confidence they know what they're doing. At least with the Wii they said they were targeting a Blue-Ocean strategy since day 1 and stuck with it. They're trying to be all Jack-of-all-Trade-y now and if they're not careful it could backfire.

[staySICK]

That god awful controller was the deal breaker for me on the gamecube. Once I was able to use my dualshock on the gamecube I played my friends' gc more often, but by then it was pretty late in the game and current gen was about come out.

[TheRevanchist]

Wii U talk from Gabe

[CorgiShinobi]

Considering they made a custom tailored Portal 2 game for that Hydra motion controller, I can believe Valve looking into the Wii U.

[TheRevanchist]

Yes, but to what extent is he talking about? Just games? Valve is daring and Nintendo wants to one up the competition with this console. Should be interesting to see how this one plays out over the next couple of years.

[RockyRan]

Considering they made a custom tailored Portal 2 game for that Hydra motion controller, I can believe Valve looking into the Wii U.

 

I thought the Hydra devs were the ones who tailored the peripheral for Portal 2

 

At least that's what a guy from Valve said when they asked about Move support on the PS3.

[Yantelope]

So Gabe goes from saying the PS3 is worthless to making it his favorite console to saying he likes the Wii U. I don't take him too seriously.

[CorgiShinobi]

Considering they made a custom tailored Portal 2 game for that Hydra motion controller, I can believe Valve looking into the Wii U.

 

I thought the Hydra devs were the ones who tailored the peripheral for Portal 2

 

At least that's what a guy from Valve said when they asked about Move support on the PS3.

I simply read this Escapist article which mentions special content for the Hydra controller. I mean, it sounds like there's suppose to be other games for the thing, but it does come with a free copy of Portal 2.

[Yantelope]

http://www.destructoid.com/naughty-dog-ps3-and-ps-vita-does-everything-wii-u-can-do-206088.phtml?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Destructoid+%28Destructoid%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

 

Naughty Dog being a 2nd party developer is a bit biased but still interesting. I'm a bit surprised that we're midway into July and we have no release date or more info on the Vita. PS3 + Vita may have capability but will they take advantage of it?

[WTF]

http: //www.destructo...t=Google+Reader

 

Naughty Dog being a 2nd party developer is a bit biased but still interesting. I'm a bit surprised that we're midway into July and we have no release date or more info on the Vita. PS3 + Vita may have capability but will they take advantage of it?

Gamescom. Sony treats that event properly. That and TGS. They're doing these announcements in phases the way I see it.

 

Also Naughty Dog is a 1st party developer. They were bought by SCE back in 2001. So they're a wholly owned subsidiary. Ice Team which is pretty much one of their internal tech divisions is a sub-group of ND. If my memory serves me right ND is part of WWS which is part of SCEI.

 

2001 was when they knew they had to buy ND and own the ips from Insomniac after they lost both Crash and Spyro to Vivendi-Universal (before the whole Activision consolidation-merger).

 

As for the WiiU it does seem like a stop-gap console since there's quite a few things that aren't exactly going its way and the specs are not final. So people are at liberty to give them the benefit of the doubt or rag at them. It was a bit stupid to announce it at E3. TGS or an investor's conference would have been better followed by E3 next year.

 

Also Jim Sterling... I thought the lack of Multitouch was common knowledge and was something some people were pissed off about?

[Yantelope]

Also Naughty Dog is a 1st party developer. They were bought by SCE back in 2001. So they're a wholly owned subsidiary.

I didn't realize that. So they're even more biased.

 

As far as the Wii U being stop-gap, I don't think Nintendo sees it that way. It seems more like Nintendo is just continuing the 5 year console cycle whereas the Sony and MS have decided to stretch this generation out further than normal. Really, I can understand why simply judging from the cost of high end hardware. PS3 was $600 for a reason when it was released and neither Sony or MS have the slightest desire to repeat that debacle.

Edited July 14, 2011 by Yantelope

[deanb]

huh didn't know about the multi-touch. Seems a bit lame to be missing in this day n age.

[WTF]

Also Naughty Dog is a 1st party developer. They were bought by SCE back in 2001. So they're a wholly owned subsidiary.

I didn't realize that. So they're even more biased.

 

As far as the Wii U being stop-gap, I don't think Nintendo sees it that way. It seems more like Nintendo is just continuing the 5 year console cycle whereas the Sony and MS have decided to stretch this generation out further than normal. Really, I can understand why simply judging from the cost of high end hardware. PS3 was $600 for a reason when it was released and neither Sony or MS have the slightest desire to repeat that debacle.

 

I don't think they're going to sit idle and not release a new machine. We'll see the WiiU sometime in 2012 and the next Xbox and PS consoles sometime in 2013. PC gaming is moving at a pretty fast pace and if you look at both companies they're not really announcing a lot of games for 2012. Yes there will be games for 2012 but we knew of at least a few titles for 2011 by this time in 2010. That and all the other rumours, yeah a new console is almost definitely going to arrive sometime in early 2013. Vita will be Sony's focus till release and that should happen late 2011 early 2012 and at E3 we'll hear rumblings for the next gen.

Nintendo's console is a stop gap because honestly they don't want to spend a lot on it and I mean look at the console's body it's really small. It's probably going to be quite medium to low-high 2011 PC comparable specced unless someone makes a really efficiently cooled system. What we currently know of it puts it above the current gen but not enough to be on par with whatever comes next gen.

 

It's good that nintendo made the first move regardless since that means we'll have a new generation faster than before.

[RockyRan]

It's good that nintendo made the first move regardless since that means we'll have a new generation faster than before.

 

That's the silver lining I'm seeing in this. This most definitely will force MS and Sony into releasing their next console sooner than they expected, because they simply can't market their consoles as well knowing that there's a console that's more powerful than theirs, even if it's just marginally more powerful.