My friend did that, didnt get it working right, the gameplay/music would be fine out on the world map, but would speed up in a house etc... known bug apparently, did you get around it?
yeah, but getting it configured to your hardware is quite tricky. I've only managed to run Wind Waker properly, both Mario galaxy games have tons of bugs. Still, worth a try
God damn it Nintendo... making a career out of falling short. Bastards. BASTARDS!
The Broadway XFB of rhose are a hard limiting factor. HDing a GCN/Wii game would be pure luck given the ways they statically set up their screen buffers in games.
Odium, you're still SO HARSH on game tech. This is definitely very post wii. Maybe xbox 360 level? I mean we can all agree it's comically outdated without pretending it's not a gigantic step forward. My cheapass computer can do better in sleep mode, of course, but it still looks like semi-modern tech.
The Broadway XFB of rhose are a hard limiting factor. HDing a GCN/Wii game would be pure luck given the ways they statically set up their screen buffers in games.
True... hopefully they rerelease Wind Waker in HD, or make the WiiU's next Zelda in the same style... yeah, I hope that happens. Also... those are circle pads on the controller. Who is going to play BF3 on circlepads lol...
God damn it Nintendo... making a career out of falling short. Bastards. BASTARDS!
It's a hardware safety measure, you run a game in the hardwarespecs it requires, and lock everything else down, it prevents running unsigned code in full (in this case) wii-u mode, and it ensures the games work.
But yeah, I share the pain, microsoft touched on the subject a bit with backwards compatibility games in HD, sadly it never became popular.
I think its cool how they handle tech. They aren't racing to a finish line of OMG WE MUST HAVE THE BEST GRAFIX EVER, but hit the core concept of why we play games. Sure, it may be a little bit of a let down that it isn't the "omg wtf new tech" demo people hyped their minds up hoping it would be - but in reality we over exaggerate our own expectations with a sense of entitlement that is unhealthy and disrespectful.
It is a little OT, but sure Nintendo (or insert: Apple) could do a lot more with their tech, and we think that because people say "Well I came up with this idea, surely <insert company> should have too? I want it, i feel cheated!" In reality, if someone had that idea, or think the tech is easy to do, then start a company and make it possible. Its easy to complain, hard to make a difference. Getting pissed off and or frustrated/let down when the labor of someone else (or in this case many people) isn't what you wanted is lame.
I think this new thing is great. I thought they'd go with the Yuu instead of Wii U, but haha Wii U is a little easier to relate with their other products.
and btw... Batman: AA on Wii U, and also a UE3 game
Even if it wasn't a new tech or whatever, nothing surprised me at all here. And when I watch E3 it's not to see the upcoming sequels to sequels but to have a big woaw.
All three conferences failed giving me that, yet again.
WiiU (soooo wierd !) montage.
I dunno, looks pretty solid. Of course, when they showcase the new Mario and Zelda titles, I'll scoop one of these up without thinking.
Such is life.
that controller has potential, but all the games they showed, you are holding that big ass controller up infront of you. how long will your arms last playing that thing? and for core games, the controller doesnt look very comfortable.
But, potential. I gotta play it to believe it. the screen would be useful for sports games where you pick plays, and rpgs for inventory or map or vitals and what not. but i dunno. I think nintendos conference was a fail.
Yeah but with the lack of graphical innovation lately it'd be hard to differentiate and have an incentive to other than 'ok new gfx now play cod u kidz'. Nintendo could probably pull forward this gen.
Yeah but with the lack of graphical innovation lately it'd be hard to differentiate and have an incentive to other than 'ok new gfx now play cod u kidz'. Nintendo could probably pull forward this gen.
There's quite a lot of innovation and technology going on today in just the pc platform, when a normal computer or even laptops comes loaded with 16 times as much RAM compared to that in a ps3, not to mention that GPU's have come quite a long way since ca 2005.
We have 360 games struggling at 30fps and pulling all the tricks in the book to fit inside the memory, and most games still running at 720p, (and while the wiiU is as capable of 1080p as the other consoles, nothing says it will default games to 1080p)
Nintendo makes games; casual, underwhelming, graphically unimpressive games.
And they've been damn successful with it, so you're all worrying/bitching about something completely irrelevant to their business strategy. Considering how successful the Wii and Kinect are it's pretty clear that gimmick hardware is a safer bet for a goldmine than high end graphics. People will eat this up as long as it's moderately priced, low specs or not.
That being said, that reveal was some stupidly bad work. First thing you say is, "It's a new console, here is the case, here is the controller, now moving on." Nintendo apparently doesn't feel that relevant information is important to their customers when they have a screen controller. :P
That being said, that reveal was some stupidly bad work. First thing you say is, "It's a new console, here is the case, here is the controller, now moving on." Nintendo apparently doesn't feel that relevant information is important to their customers when they have a screen controller. :P
Well, they've been succesful at one thing; people are talking about it.
I wonder whether they tried to confuse people on purpose, or whether I'm overestimating Reggie's evil-genius-power-level.
They will, fast forward a year or two, be the lower end platform.
They're the "low end" platform (graphically speaking) NOW, and look how it's worked out for them.
Releasing a new platform while your competition is years away from releasing theirs is a smart move. It's almost like your taking turns instead of engaging in head-to-head competition. People who want to play the new Zelda, Metroid, whatever, are going to buy it, regardless. People who aren't into those games weren't going to buy it, regardless. Why should Nintendo invest heavily in mindblowing graphics and inflate their price chasing non-customers?
I play on the PC, so I don't really have a stake in it, but you can't argue with Nintendo's success. Aging gamers seem to be irked that Nintendo didn't "grow up" with them.
One word: Famicom. Nintendo has always been about FAMILY gaming. We can all point out third party games that eschew the family friendly side of gaming that were on Nintendo systems, but at it's core, Nintendo is about family gaming.
With that said, it does kind of seem like a cop out that they just keep tweaking Gamecube level graphics, but they would rather invest in innovative gameplay and keep their price point low.
I do wish nintendo was still the sort of company that actually created new IPs, rather than just re-using the same ones for the last 2 decades.
So, the last ten years...
MS - Halo
Epic - UT/Gears
Blizzard - Warcraft
EA - same fucking sports games since the dawn of time itself, and also Battlefield series
etc etc.
IP recycling has been the rule rather than the exception lately. I hardly think Nintendo can be blamed for doing it with some of the most iconic franchises in the industry. Sure, something new would be nice, but why make a platformer that isn't Mario when you can make Mario again? Fresh IPs makes creative sense, but it's economically retarded.
Epic created the Gears IP, and EA and created a lot of franchises from mirror's edge, to dead space, and a lot of others. Even Halo was created in in the xbox generation.
Nintendo on the other hand is still re-using things from the original nintendo console. Back then they were creative. Now they just re-hash. Not that I mind remakes. I love a new mario. It'd just be nice if they also were trying to make the next metroid/mario/whatever too.
Epic created the Gears IP, and EA and created a lot of franchises from mirror's edge, to dead space, and a lot of others. Even Halo was created in in the xbox generation.
Nintendo on the other hand is still re-using things from the original nintendo console. Back then they were creative. Now they just re-hash. Not that I mind remakes. I love a new mario. It'd just be nice if they also were trying to make the next metroid/mario/whatever too.
Scale for company lifespan (in terms of game development) and it becomes pretty fair. Doesn't matter what you think of it, but there have been a whole lot of games with numerals in their titles in the last ten years. Nintendo can't be blamed for milking their cash cows anymore than other companies. Less even since they have guaranteed income from their sequels.
MS - Halo
Epic - UT/Gears
Blizzard - Warcraft
EA - same fucking sports games since the dawn of time itself, and also Battlefield series
etc etc.
IP recycling has been the rule rather than the exception lately. I hardly think Nintendo can be blamed for doing it with some of the most iconic franchises in the industry. Sure, something new would be nice, but why make a platformer that isn't Mario when you can make Mario again? Fresh IPs makes creative sense, but it's economically retarded.
Scale for company lifespan (in terms of game development) and it becomes pretty fair.
It does become fair... if by fair you mean completely meaningless. Filtering reality on random criteria does not lead to useful conclusions.
MS does a lot of stuff other than Halo and 'MS' is an umbrella for a bunch of studios. Same with EA, and comparing seasonal sports to IP bankruptcy is pointless. Epic is busy making middle-ware, Gears isn't that old and there is Infinity Blade & Bulletstorm.
Even Capcom with their 80%+ sequel policy has created new franchises in the last decade.
The only company that compares with Nintendo for rehashing IP is Blizzard, but we know they're working on a new IP so that still puts them ahead.
Nintendo had Mii's though. I guess that counts, sort of?
The point isn't whether or not Nintendo is successful; it's how long will this keep working?
I still haven't bothered to pick up Super Mario Galaxy 2. Okami/Batman/Darksiders has destroyed any interest I had left in Zelda games. Metroid is a big meh now and Starfox was driven into the ground years ago. I was raised on Nintendo and now I don't care for them at all and have no faith they'll ever evolve. That's a little scary.
They're the "low end" platform (graphically speaking) NOW, and look how it's worked out for them.
Releasing a new platform while your competition is years away from releasing theirs is a smart move. It's almost like your taking turns instead of engaging in head-to-head competition.
Didn't work out for the Dreamcast, although that was only 1.5~ years ahead... but still.
Dreamcast wasn't helped by the Saturn, Nomad and 32X disasters before it. As far as I know, Nintendo only had one crap system in their history being the Virtual Boy... so they're not really in the same "my money anus is bleeding" situation SEGA had.
What Leilei said. Nintendo is in a unique position that their user base isn't as obsessed with hardware specs. We also see other systems emerging and starting to match current hardware power in handhelds and phones putting their system in a place for more cross platform products.
Now simply isn't the best time for a company like nintendo to try to come out with a huge leap in console power. They are the master of peripherals right now and they're going to push that strength with a console that can do what everything else can while doing it in fun new ways.
This thing seems really confusing to me for a few reasons. For one, it's as powerful as a 360, uses your TV but also has an LCD screen built into the controller for optional viewing. What the hell? What would I want to switch back and forth between both controller and TV for viewing? It seems like that would tire you out pretty fast. The fact that it's slightly less powerful than a 360 is weird. I mean it's obviously going to get a bit more 3rd party support with multi platform titles. But considering it doesn't come out until next year and we're already closing in on the end of this gen cycle, that doesn't seem like a lot of time left to grab 3rd party. The minute 360 and PS3 push out their next systems this unit will be ignored by 3rd party for the most part. Why didn't they release something with higher end graphics, ditch the weird controller gimmick and keep the backward compatibly with the Wii hardware/games? That would have made a lot more sense and kept it more future proof.
This thing seems really confusing to me for a few reasons. For one, it's as powerful as a 360, uses your TV but also has an LCD screen built into the controller for optional viewing. What the hell? What would I want to switch back and forth between both controller and TV for viewing? It seems like that would tire you out pretty fast. The fact that it's slightly less powerful than a 360 is weird. I mean it's obviously going to get a bit more 3rd party support with multi platform titles. But considering it doesn't come out until next year and we're already closing in on the end of this gen cycle, that doesn't seem like a lot of time left to grab 3rd party. The minute 360 and PS3 push out their next systems this unit will be ignored by 3rd party for the most part. Why didn't they release something with higher end graphics, ditch the weird controller gimmick and keep the backward compatibly with the Wii hardware/games? That would have made a lot more sense and kept it more future proof.
Where do you get that it's slightly less powerful than a 360? Personally I might get it based on the price. The tablet seems nice and I would love removing interface clutter from the big screen and throw it on a smaller screen. Worked well for Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles and I think it could work well for lots of other games.
I could also see a combination of the drawing part of the tablet and character customization be used for future games like they showed for that Tekken game.
But yeah, until they show more games for it, price or system specs I won't make too many judgements about it. Love the tablet controller concept though. But I hate the name.
From what I remember hearing, Sony won't be pushing out a new console any time soon.
Bit with the specs on the new console, but overall it should be nice.
Just hoping they make standard games again, rather than gimmicky stuff.
Skyward Sword = Uninterested
New Zelda = Interested
OOT 3ds = played it before <_<
Still. Seems nice, but i'll probably get an NGP first.
It does become fair... if by fair you mean completely meaningless. Filtering reality on random criteria does not lead to useful conclusions.
Hardly random, and the conclusion is self evident and has been so for years. Sequels are in. This is sorta good, sorta bad, all business. Whatever *shrug*.
The point isn't whether or not Nintendo is successful; it's how long will this keep working?
It's been 30 years of Mario; You have to assume it will keep working for as long as they keep it going. Through that span you will constantly engage new people who never played the earlier games, so it's a self-renewing franchise when it lasts that long anyways.
It's been 30 years of Mario; You have to assume it will keep working for as long as they keep it going. Through that span you will constantly engage new people who never played the earlier games, so it's a self-renewing franchise when it lasts that long anyways.
I dunno about that, they basically coasted on the sales of their handhelds (thanks to Pokemon reviving the Gameboy brand) sense the ps1 era until Wii was released. If it wasnt for that they'd likely have gone the way of Sega or at least be a shadow of what they are today.
they're going to push that strength with a console that can do what everything else can while doing it in fun new ways.
The WiiU tablet doesn't really do anything that the PSVita can't do. While the Vita is a separate console costing as much as a normal console, it does in fact do much more, while still covering the same bases as the WiiU tablet.
so they're not really in the same "my money anus is bleeding" situation SEGA had.
I'm not saying the console won't sell well, but it's not future proof and for that reason alone I likely won't get one unless there's massively insane must-have exclusives (of which I've seen none announced yet). Within two years, Sony and MS will launch new consoles that make a technical leap far outside of what the WiiU can do. This makes it a huge pain in the ass for developers (much like it already is) in that they have to spend a lot of resources to convert their titles to get them running on such low spec hardware. Most just bypass the console altogether. Those that do get ported are often watered down versions lacking content.
I dunno about that, they basically coasted on the sales of their handhelds (thanks to Pokemon reviving the Gameboy brand) sense the ps1 era until Wii was released. If it wasnt for that they'd likely have gone the way of Sega or at least be a shadow of what they are today.
They weren't coasting with the N64, totally the opposite. Nintendo had far and away the most powerful fifth-gen console - the first 64-bit chip, the first with unified memory and I believe Super Mario 64 was the first true 3D game on a home console. Nintendo did then what people are complaining they won't do now, making the most graphically advanced system on the market.
Nintendo lost the battle to the inferior Playstation in part because they made the mistake of going with cartridges rather than discs and part because Sony beat them to market by a full year. If you had the choice on launch day of an N64 and Mario 64 for $310 or the PS1 with Battle Arena Toshinden for $350, you'd take the Nintendo.
I can see bagging Nintendo for phoning it in with the GameCube, that wasn't a great machine, but the Nintendo 64 was a bad motherfucker. If Nintendo stuck with discs like they had originally planned, Sony probably doesn't even make a Playstation, much less win the generation.
Yeah, but they still had profits of nearly one billion dollars. Let me say that again with my Dr. Evil Voice: one BILLION dollars. That ought to keep them stocked up on Ramen until the next system debuts.
And of course their profits have dropped, as nearly everyone has a Wii already. It's currently the third-best selling console in history, and anyone who wanted one probably has it by now. Sega wishes to hell it had that problem - Nintendo has already sold more Wiis than every single unit of every Sega console COMBINED.
Nintendo didn't create measures to ensure they would find new projects and revenues streams once people stopped buying the Wii.
The scary part, they're either extremely lucky to have the timing correct for new sales or they planned the cycle in such a way that it fell on their revenues plans.
Either way, Nintendo ain't going anywhere...unless you know, people STOP buying that stuff.
Bit with the specs on the new console, but overall it should be nice.
what specs.... They`ve said jack shit about specs, besides that it wont be using bluray, but rather their own developed format, flash memory inside, and an IBM processory. Thats about it. No real specs there.
Nintendo's drop likely has to do with iPhone completely dominating and destroying the handheld market. I think the 3DS was long dead before it even hit the shelf.
Like most hardcore gamers, I'm very wary about any Nintendo product. I won't consider buying until there's that system selling 'killer app' worth buying it for.
All that matters are the games, and since we have no indication of what will be out for the Wii U (beside the multiplatform games, which will come out on PS3 & 360 anyway) we'll have to look at how they handled the wii...
The WiiU tablet doesn't really do anything that the PSVita can't do. While the Vita is a separate console costing as much as a normal console, it does in fact do much more, while still covering the same bases as the WiiU tablet.
Big difference being, a screened controller comes as a standard with the wiiu, every console will have it.
They'll never be able to fully design ps3 games around the a vita control, as much as they never did it with the psp + ps3 even though they could, because they'll never know if their userbase will have it.
what specs.... They`ve said jack shit about specs, besides that it wont be using bluray, but rather their own developed format, flash memory inside, and an IBM processory. Thats about it. No real specs there.
It's pretty much widely known that it's a slightly better than current console generation.
While they're earlier than they were the last generation (wii, ps3, 360) it's still pretty much equalent to what they did with the wii.
But it's still going to be much more expensive than current generation.
While sony and ms sell their consoles at a loss, they can afford that, because their userbase buy a lot of games, but nintendos userbase will not buy anywhere near the amount of games a typical 360 or ps3 owning gamer will do, so they will sell their periphirals and console at a profit, getting most of their money from that.
Boating high console sales (but never actually being able to boast number of games sold in total)
what specs.... They`ve said jack shit about specs, besides that it wont be using bluray, but rather their own developed format, flash memory inside, and an IBM processory. Thats about it. No real specs there.
To be fair, I was just going off of what others have said.
Perhaps I put too much faith in the knowledge of the polycount community.
Eld, on the other hand...
...who tweeted that it was actually slightly less powerful than the 360
it must be true! he tweeted it!
regarding the controller - personally, i think it looks clunky and not something i'd want to play with. but i'll have to get my hands on it to be sure.
will be strange seeing multi-platform games on a nintendo again!
Replies
Some specs
God damn it Nintendo... making a career out of falling short. Bastards. BASTARDS!
yeah, but getting it configured to your hardware is quite tricky. I've only managed to run Wind Waker properly, both Mario galaxy games have tons of bugs. Still, worth a try
... a Suck?
... a Salami?
... a Shi- you get the idea.
Hide the neurotoxin!
The Broadway XFB of rhose are a hard limiting factor. HDing a GCN/Wii game would be pure luck given the ways they statically set up their screen buffers in games.
Odium, you're still SO HARSH on game tech. This is definitely very post wii. Maybe xbox 360 level? I mean we can all agree it's comically outdated without pretending it's not a gigantic step forward. My cheapass computer can do better in sleep mode, of course, but it still looks like semi-modern tech.
True... hopefully they rerelease Wind Waker in HD, or make the WiiU's next Zelda in the same style... yeah, I hope that happens. Also... those are circle pads on the controller. Who is going to play BF3 on circlepads lol...
It's a hardware safety measure, you run a game in the hardwarespecs it requires, and lock everything else down, it prevents running unsigned code in full (in this case) wii-u mode, and it ensures the games work.
But yeah, I share the pain, microsoft touched on the subject a bit with backwards compatibility games in HD, sadly it never became popular.
It is a little OT, but sure Nintendo (or insert: Apple) could do a lot more with their tech, and we think that because people say "Well I came up with this idea, surely <insert company> should have too? I want it, i feel cheated!" In reality, if someone had that idea, or think the tech is easy to do, then start a company and make it possible. Its easy to complain, hard to make a difference. Getting pissed off and or frustrated/let down when the labor of someone else (or in this case many people) isn't what you wanted is lame.
I think this new thing is great. I thought they'd go with the Yuu instead of Wii U, but haha Wii U is a little easier to relate with their other products.
and btw... Batman: AA on Wii U, and also a UE3 game
All three conferences failed giving me that, yet again.
WiiU (soooo wierd !) montage.
I dunno, looks pretty solid. Of course, when they showcase the new Mario and Zelda titles, I'll scoop one of these up without thinking.
Such is life.
Ohhhhhh.
(nevermind)
that controller has potential, but all the games they showed, you are holding that big ass controller up infront of you. how long will your arms last playing that thing? and for core games, the controller doesnt look very comfortable.
But, potential. I gotta play it to believe it. the screen would be useful for sports games where you pick plays, and rpgs for inventory or map or vitals and what not. but i dunno. I think nintendos conference was a fail.
Sony won in my books.
specs on it from IBM:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/07/ibm-puts-watsons-brains-in-nintendo-wii-u/
Until nintendo realizes that the main line hardware just got way more powerful as MS and sony announce their new consoles further on..
They will, fast forward a year or two, be the lower end platform.
I think there is some chemistry there :P
There's quite a lot of innovation and technology going on today in just the pc platform, when a normal computer or even laptops comes loaded with 16 times as much RAM compared to that in a ps3, not to mention that GPU's have come quite a long way since ca 2005.
We have 360 games struggling at 30fps and pulling all the tricks in the book to fit inside the memory, and most games still running at 720p, (and while the wiiU is as capable of 1080p as the other consoles, nothing says it will default games to 1080p)
And they've been damn successful with it, so you're all worrying/bitching about something completely irrelevant to their business strategy. Considering how successful the Wii and Kinect are it's pretty clear that gimmick hardware is a safer bet for a goldmine than high end graphics. People will eat this up as long as it's moderately priced, low specs or not.
That being said, that reveal was some stupidly bad work. First thing you say is, "It's a new console, here is the case, here is the controller, now moving on." Nintendo apparently doesn't feel that relevant information is important to their customers when they have a screen controller. :P
Nintendo can only make so many games, third party is always where it's at.
Well, they've been succesful at one thing; people are talking about it.
I wonder whether they tried to confuse people on purpose, or whether I'm overestimating Reggie's evil-genius-power-level.
They're the "low end" platform (graphically speaking) NOW, and look how it's worked out for them.
Releasing a new platform while your competition is years away from releasing theirs is a smart move. It's almost like your taking turns instead of engaging in head-to-head competition. People who want to play the new Zelda, Metroid, whatever, are going to buy it, regardless. People who aren't into those games weren't going to buy it, regardless. Why should Nintendo invest heavily in mindblowing graphics and inflate their price chasing non-customers?
I play on the PC, so I don't really have a stake in it, but you can't argue with Nintendo's success. Aging gamers seem to be irked that Nintendo didn't "grow up" with them.
One word: Famicom. Nintendo has always been about FAMILY gaming. We can all point out third party games that eschew the family friendly side of gaming that were on Nintendo systems, but at it's core, Nintendo is about family gaming.
With that said, it does kind of seem like a cop out that they just keep tweaking Gamecube level graphics, but they would rather invest in innovative gameplay and keep their price point low.
So, the last ten years...
MS - Halo
Epic - UT/Gears
Blizzard - Warcraft
EA - same fucking sports games since the dawn of time itself, and also Battlefield series
etc etc.
IP recycling has been the rule rather than the exception lately. I hardly think Nintendo can be blamed for doing it with some of the most iconic franchises in the industry. Sure, something new would be nice, but why make a platformer that isn't Mario when you can make Mario again? Fresh IPs makes creative sense, but it's economically retarded.
Epic created the Gears IP, and EA and created a lot of franchises from mirror's edge, to dead space, and a lot of others. Even Halo was created in in the xbox generation.
Nintendo on the other hand is still re-using things from the original nintendo console. Back then they were creative. Now they just re-hash. Not that I mind remakes. I love a new mario. It'd just be nice if they also were trying to make the next metroid/mario/whatever too.
The Wii hasn't been too friendly to third parties, sales-wise, hopefully this won't be the case with the new one.
Scale for company lifespan (in terms of game development) and it becomes pretty fair. Doesn't matter what you think of it, but there have been a whole lot of games with numerals in their titles in the last ten years. Nintendo can't be blamed for milking their cash cows anymore than other companies. Less even since they have guaranteed income from their sequels.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Mario_video_game_remakes
You'll find that no other games or characters of those you mentioned will ever come near this.
MS does a lot of stuff other than Halo and 'MS' is an umbrella for a bunch of studios. Same with EA, and comparing seasonal sports to IP bankruptcy is pointless. Epic is busy making middle-ware, Gears isn't that old and there is Infinity Blade & Bulletstorm.
Even Capcom with their 80%+ sequel policy has created new franchises in the last decade.
The only company that compares with Nintendo for rehashing IP is Blizzard, but we know they're working on a new IP so that still puts them ahead.
Nintendo had Mii's though. I guess that counts, sort of?
The point isn't whether or not Nintendo is successful; it's how long will this keep working?
I still haven't bothered to pick up Super Mario Galaxy 2. Okami/Batman/Darksiders has destroyed any interest I had left in Zelda games. Metroid is a big meh now and Starfox was driven into the ground years ago. I was raised on Nintendo and now I don't care for them at all and have no faith they'll ever evolve. That's a little scary.
Didn't work out for the Dreamcast, although that was only 1.5~ years ahead... but still.
Now simply isn't the best time for a company like nintendo to try to come out with a huge leap in console power. They are the master of peripherals right now and they're going to push that strength with a console that can do what everything else can while doing it in fun new ways.
Where do you get that it's slightly less powerful than a 360? Personally I might get it based on the price. The tablet seems nice and I would love removing interface clutter from the big screen and throw it on a smaller screen. Worked well for Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles and I think it could work well for lots of other games.
I could also see a combination of the drawing part of the tablet and character customization be used for future games like they showed for that Tekken game.
But yeah, until they show more games for it, price or system specs I won't make too many judgements about it. Love the tablet controller concept though. But I hate the name.
Bit
Just hoping they make standard games again, rather than gimmicky stuff.
Skyward Sword = Uninterested
New Zelda = Interested
OOT 3ds = played it before <_<
Still. Seems nice, but i'll probably get an NGP first.
Hardly random, and the conclusion is self evident and has been so for years. Sequels are in. This is sorta good, sorta bad, all business. Whatever *shrug*.
It's been 30 years of Mario; You have to assume it will keep working for as long as they keep it going. Through that span you will constantly engage new people who never played the earlier games, so it's a self-renewing franchise when it lasts that long anyways.
I dunno about that, they basically coasted on the sales of their handhelds (thanks to Pokemon reviving the Gameboy brand) sense the ps1 era until Wii was released. If it wasnt for that they'd likely have gone the way of Sega or at least be a shadow of what they are today.
The WiiU tablet doesn't really do anything that the PSVita can't do. While the Vita is a separate console costing as much as a normal console, it does in fact do much more, while still covering the same bases as the WiiU tablet.
orly? "Nintendo profits fall by 66%"
http://e3.gamespot.com/story/6310161/wii-successor-confirmed-for-2012-nintendo-profits-fall-by-66/?tag=result%3Btitle%3B0
I'm not saying the console won't sell well, but it's not future proof and for that reason alone I likely won't get one unless there's massively insane must-have exclusives (of which I've seen none announced yet). Within two years, Sony and MS will launch new consoles that make a technical leap far outside of what the WiiU can do. This makes it a huge pain in the ass for developers (much like it already is) in that they have to spend a lot of resources to convert their titles to get them running on such low spec hardware. Most just bypass the console altogether. Those that do get ported are often watered down versions lacking content.
They weren't coasting with the N64, totally the opposite. Nintendo had far and away the most powerful fifth-gen console - the first 64-bit chip, the first with unified memory and I believe Super Mario 64 was the first true 3D game on a home console. Nintendo did then what people are complaining they won't do now, making the most graphically advanced system on the market.
Nintendo lost the battle to the inferior Playstation in part because they made the mistake of going with cartridges rather than discs and part because Sony beat them to market by a full year. If you had the choice on launch day of an N64 and Mario 64 for $310 or the PS1 with Battle Arena Toshinden for $350, you'd take the Nintendo.
I can see bagging Nintendo for phoning it in with the GameCube, that wasn't a great machine, but the Nintendo 64 was a bad motherfucker. If Nintendo stuck with discs like they had originally planned, Sony probably doesn't even make a Playstation, much less win the generation.
Yeah, but they still had profits of nearly one billion dollars. Let me say that again with my Dr. Evil Voice: one BILLION dollars. That ought to keep them stocked up on Ramen until the next system debuts.
And of course their profits have dropped, as nearly everyone has a Wii already. It's currently the third-best selling console in history, and anyone who wanted one probably has it by now. Sega wishes to hell it had that problem - Nintendo has already sold more Wiis than every single unit of every Sega console COMBINED.
The scary part, they're either extremely lucky to have the timing correct for new sales or they planned the cycle in such a way that it fell on their revenues plans.
Either way, Nintendo ain't going anywhere...unless you know, people STOP buying that stuff.
what specs.... They`ve said jack shit about specs, besides that it wont be using bluray, but rather their own developed format, flash memory inside, and an IBM processory. Thats about it. No real specs there.
Like most hardcore gamers, I'm very wary about any Nintendo product. I won't consider buying until there's that system selling 'killer app' worth buying it for.
..yeah not so comforting
Big difference being, a screened controller comes as a standard with the wiiu, every console will have it.
They'll never be able to fully design ps3 games around the a vita control, as much as they never did it with the psp + ps3 even though they could, because they'll never know if their userbase will have it.
It's pretty much widely known that it's a slightly better than current console generation.
While they're earlier than they were the last generation (wii, ps3, 360) it's still pretty much equalent to what they did with the wii.
But it's still going to be much more expensive than current generation.
While sony and ms sell their consoles at a loss, they can afford that, because their userbase buy a lot of games, but nintendos userbase will not buy anywhere near the amount of games a typical 360 or ps3 owning gamer will do, so they will sell their periphirals and console at a profit, getting most of their money from that.
Boating high console sales (but never actually being able to boast number of games sold in total)
Perhaps I put too much faith in the knowledge of the polycount community.
Eld, on the other hand...
Not according to a developer from DICE, who tweeted that it was actually slightly less powerful than the 360
it must be true! he tweeted it!
regarding the controller - personally, i think it looks clunky and not something i'd want to play with. but i'll have to get my hands on it to be sure.
will be strange seeing multi-platform games on a nintendo again!