Well uhh... hes probably been playing with a dev kit for a while now?
Believe me, I want this thing to be the most powerful console on the market, so there can be multiplatform titles on it, but I'm just going by what I've read.
For a company that used to be ahead of the curve and setting standards for consoles in the old days to playing catch up now.
They again putting too much on new control method (aka gimmickry) and not enough of third party support and power into the console, as far as I can make out it's going to be ps3/360 level, so why on earth would I want to buy this PoS when I have both of those + a pc ... I've had enough of mario over the last 10+ years and unless they bring something new to the table there is no point.
The rumoured power7 cpu in use in the wiiU doesn't come in anything less than 4 cores.
Also, unreal-engine 3 will be running on it too considering arkam city will be released for the platform.
And since we are expecting a pretty similar platform to the 360 and ps3 in terms of performance, it would be strange of it to have less memory than those.
For a company that used to be ahead of the curve and setting standards for consoles in the old days to playing catch up now.
They again putting too much on new control method (aka gimmickry) and not enough of third party support and power into the console, as far as I can make out it's going to be ps3/360 level, so why on earth would I want to buy this PoS when I have both of those + a pc ... I've had enough of mario over the last 10+ years and unless they bring something new to the table there is no point.
What you describe as a 'gimmick' is the thing that made the Nintendo Wii stand out and sell better than its competitors.
For all intents and purposes, an Xbox 360 and a Playstation 3 are the same thing. Yeah, PS3 has blu-ray and the online services aren't identical, but if you want to play Assassin's Creed or Arkham Asylum, you can play it on either system with essentially no difference. Same look same feel, same inputs, etc. That's two consoles dedicated to high-end tech and 'hardcore' gamer experiences. Why should Nintendo try doing that? Do we really need a third console that's attempting to do what the other two do?
If what you want out of your next generation of consoles is simply more power, there are already two options out there for you. Nintendo's just not for you.
What you describe as a 'gimmick' is the thing that made the Nintendo Wii stand out and sell better than its competitors.
It did sell better but for many reasons the overall game sales have been better on the other platforms, luckily they sold the console at a profit, but they never pushed more games than the other platforms.
The name of the console could've essentially been wii sports.
playstation network and xbox live has done (dare I say it) a lot more for gaming than the wii-mote has, not to mention that both sony and microsoft have much healthier relationships with indie-developers.
It did sell better but for many reasons the overall game sales have been better on the other platforms, luckily they sold the console at a profit, but they never pushed more games than the other platforms.
Not actually true. In terms of cross-platform games, it is true that the Wii versions pretty much never sold as well as their PS3/360 equivalents. But a LOT of Wii-exclusive titles pushed more units than games on the other platforms. And not just Nintendo titles, either. Just Dance is one of the stand-out third party success stories of this console generation.
It just goes to show how effective properly targeted development can be. If you are trying to pitch Call of Duty on a console who's primary user base is small children and the parents of small children, you're going to come up short. Produce an accessible family-friendly dancing game on the same platform, and you're rolling in cash.
The danger of the WiiU is not whether or not it can sell games. It's whether or not Nintendo can actually appeal to the teens and young adults who have embraced the Playstation and XBox brands. A lot of that crowd was raised in an environment where "Playstation" was synonymous with "video games," and where the XBox hosted the first multiplayer shooter they ever knew.
A lot of the Wii crowd are now parents with less free time and children to think about. Those people grew up in the age of Nintendo, and trust Nintendo to provide child-friendly games that can still appeal to adults. They are also more susceptible to nostalgia, and actually prefer for Nintendo to take advantage of that. With the Wii, Nintendo managed to appeal directly to this demographic, while reaching out to other groups.
The danger of the WiiU is that Nintendo might be overreaching. They have their cake, and now they want everyone else's cake as well. I don't think it will be difficult to sell current Wii owners on the WiiU. But drawing in teenagers and young adults is going to be a much steeper challenge.
Not actually true. In terms of cross-platform games, it is true that the Wii versions pretty much never sold as well as their PS3/360 equivalents. But a LOT of Wii-exclusive titles pushed more units than games on the other platforms. And not just Nintendo titles, either. Just Dance is one of the stand-out third party success stories of this console generation.
I know there were great hits on the wii, even obscure anti soccer-mum games like monster hunter tri hit quite nice.
But it still remains the fact that your average wii owner will be buying less games than your average 360/ps3 owner.
That's the thing nintendo wants now, they've made a fantastic success in reaching out to markets that were unreachable, but these markets aren't into buying games in the same scope the 'hardcore' market is.
Nintendo does one thing fantastically right, they are very strong on backwards-compatibility.
So apparently the wiiU will be one tablet-screen controller only, no extras will be sold, no extras will be supported.
All the local multiplayer potential crushed in an instant.
I'm not so sure. And if this turns out to be less of an issue than expected, Sony and Microsoft are to blame.
Local multiplayer has become the realm of casual party games. It has also become the realm of the Wii. The Wii has from the beginning embraced local multiplayer, and a lot of games have been built for it that take advantage of local multiplayer. It is well know as the "party" system.
The PS3 and 360 both have a much stronger focus on internet multiplayer. If you are playing the latest shooter, you do your multiplayer on-line. There are even some games produced for those systems that don't have ANY local multiplayer, preferring to focus on the on-line component.
For on-line multiplayer, you only need one PS3/360 equivalent controller. (the WiiPad) So only having one WiiPad per system isn't going to damage on-line multiplayer in the slightest, or prevent any of the 3rd-party ports from coming to the WiiU.
It is sad that we won't be able to enjoy touch screen games locally. But it won't be a difficult up-sell for existing Wii owners. Their current accessories will still be useful.
But it still remains the fact that your average wii owner will be buying less games than your average 360/ps3 owner.
That's the thing nintendo wants now, they've made a fantastic success in reaching out to markets that were unreachable, but these markets aren't into buying games in the same scope the 'hardcore' market is.
That's a fair assessment. It is immaterial from Nintendo's perspective, since most of those few games are published by them. And of course, the fact that they make a profit off of their hardware insures that they are making money even if NO games are purchased. (part of the reason why the Wii was such a huge success)
And of course, that's why they are trying to get more "hardcore" gamers with the WiiU. They already have the casual market sewn up. Up-selling existing Wii owners on the WiiU is going to be a walk in the park. Expanding into Playstation-era demographics is going to be much more of a challenge.
Think four swords kind of potential, or people playing any kind of game locally where they have results on the big screen but can hide data on their own pad.
One big bane of local gaming is that you always had to either design the game around everyone being aware of everything that's going on, even in split-screen games where you wouldn't want it.
Wow. If this turns out to be true, that is a colossal fuckup on Nintendo's part. some of the best possibilities involve multiple players having access to separate screens. Maybe the PR guy was just confused, and meant it's not sold as a stand-alone device.
Up-selling existing Wii owners on the WiiU is going to be a walk in the park. Expanding into Playstation-era demographics is going to be much more of a challenge.
is it though? I know a lot of people who bought thw Wii for the fun/novelty factor or whatever and none of them still actually use it (well except for my mother-in-law but only for netflix). I don't know if there's any way to track how many people actully use their Wii's but I'm pretty sure that most of them will think about how much dust it's collected before they go and buy the WiiU.
Think four swords kind of potential, or people playing any kind of game locally where they have results on the big screen but can hide data on their own pad.
Oh, I have thought about it. And I'm very sad that it isn't going to be feasible with the WiiU and its one-pad-per-console approach. It was the first place my mind went when I heard they were including a screen on the controller, and I'm sure a lot of other gamers were thinking the same thing.
At the same time, I'm also thinking about a real-time playable version of Dungeons and Dragons where the guy with the tablet is the dungeon master. There is still a lot of potential for local multiplayer with this concept. It's not the same kind of potential, but it's still there.
is it though? I know a lot of people who bought thw Wii for the fun/novelty factor or whatever and none of them still actually use it (well except for my mother-in-law but only for netflix).
And how many of those people were between the ages of 17-30? And how many of them will be snagged once again by the fun/novelty of another Nintendo console that is once again doing something different?
It is easy to question the longevity of the Wii. But then, Nintendo just announced its successor. They weren't expecting it to last as long as either the 360 or PS3. Hell, they probably didn't have any idea that it would do as well as it has. I think its quite canny that they are billing the WiiU as an extension of the successful Wii branding. Even if there are Wiis collecting dust right now, that doesn't negate the positive response that it got when it was novel and fresh.
Of course, that's also where the price becomes a major factor. Novel and fresh is a lot easier to swallow when it is inexpensive. Nintendo needs to keep the cost of the WiiU closer to impulse levels. And that's not going to be easy with the current lowered prices of the 360 and PS3. It's true that the situation at present is far different from when the Wii launched. There is still no guaranteed success for the WiiU.
Wow. If this turns out to be true, that is a colossal fuckup on Nintendo's part. some of the best possibilities involve multiple players having access to separate screens. Maybe the PR guy was just confused, and meant it's not sold as a stand-alone device.
The bandwith is probably the problem, streaming all the that information, high def visuals lots of analog controls would put the strain on any wifi(if it is wifi),even for just a single controller.
Concerning the Wii U, I have absolutely zero interest in putting a big, clunky, undoubtedly expensive controller on the floor to pretend it's a golf tee.
Nintendo needs to cut the bullshit. I didn't mind the Wii, my wife and I still sit down to play it every other night or so (though we held off on buying that, too, so we've still got games we don't have or haven't gotten through). But the Wii U I'll likely be skipping over.
The bandwith is probably the problem, streaming all the that information, high def visuals lots of analog controls would put the strain on any wifi(if it is wifi),even for just a single controller.
It may have more to do with not being able to render all those images and stream them as well. Having to render an HD main image + 4 480p(or whatever res it is) images is quite a bit.
It may have more to do with not being able to render all those images and stream them as well. Having to render an HD main image + 4 480p(or whatever res it is) images is quite a bit.
Rendering could be dirt cheap, it's all depending on what it has to render, split screen has been done before, it wouldn't have to be full resolution, nor do I suspect the pad is even HD.
I can't see bandwidth as being an issue either.
I think this boils down to some other reasons, like the amount of money people would have to put into the wiiU to have a full family multiplayer experience, and the disappointment of that family when their children realizes only one of these new 'gameboys' can actually play a singleplayer game at the same time.
Nintendo wants to be seen as the family friendly company first and foremost, this is why online had previously suffered so much in such a similar fashion.
The bandwith is probably the problem, streaming all the that information, high def visuals lots of analog controls would put the strain on any wifi(if it is wifi),even for just a single controller.
Hadn't thought about that, but you make a good point. It's just very disappointing to think that the best thing about the WiiU is essentially single-player only. I guess that's the 'U' they were talking about, since it's not really a 'We' console out of the box.
Concerning the Wii U, I have absolutely zero interest in putting a big, clunky, undoubtedly expensive controller on the floor to pretend it's a golf tee.
Nintendo needs to cut the bullshit. I didn't mind the Wii, my wife and I still sit down to play it every other night or so (though we held off on buying that, too, so we've still got games we don't have or haven't gotten through). But the Wii U I'll likely be skipping over.
Why do they need to "cut the bullshit"? They won this generation in hardware sales, hands down.
Concerning the Wii U, I have absolutely zero interest in putting a big, clunky, undoubtedly expensive controller on the floor to pretend it's a golf tee.
Nintendo needs to cut the bullshit. I didn't mind the Wii, my wife and I still sit down to play it every other night or so (though we held off on buying that, too, so we've still got games we don't have or haven't gotten through). But the Wii U I'll likely be skipping over.
I completely disagree. I wasn't a huge fan of the Wii (latency problems on the controller pissed me off), but at least Nintendo had the balls to go out and do something different, and they're doing it again. At least someone is.
I don't simply want xbox 720 and ps4,5, and 6, because without Nintendo they'd most likely be the same shit with better graphics. I want new experiences. graphics are more than fine as they are. Companies just need to let their artists be more creative.
So where is the shadow of the colossus of the wii, where's the god of war of the wii.
Where can I play a game like heavy rain on it.
How will I get a seamless online experience like in demons souls on the wii.
Where are the huge openworld elderscrolls equalents on the wii?
I could go on forever, but do know that in calling every other console off as unimaginative, or not different enough would look past the fact that these companies have made solid consoles for the third party developers to make beautiful solid game experience sans any kind of superfluous input method.
I'd like to see Nintendo have some balls to do that, maybe with their new platform they have.
I think everyone here on this forum would love to get way more swinging room on future consoles, especially in terms of memory.
So where is the shadow of the colossus of the wii, where's the god of war of the wii.
Where can I play a game like heavy rain on it.
How will I get a seamless online experience like in demons souls on the wii.
Where are the huge openworld elderscrolls equalents on the wii?
These are all terrible examples for the point you're trying to make.
Shadow of the Colossus was produced on the PS2, and the biggest complaint in that game was how badly it chugged on the PS2's dated hardware. It probably would have been a better game if it had been designed from the ground up for the GameCube. (and would have run even better if they had ported it to the Wii)
God of War's claim to fame was a well-told story in the first game, and decently polished hack-and-slash mechanics. Every God of War since the first one has had crap stories, and very little has changed in the combat mechanics. (they're still good, but they aren't any different from the first game)
You can play a game like Heavy Rain on any console, because it's mainly just a series of glorified quick-time events. When they added Move support to it, they basically made it much more similar to most Wii games. Aside from the highly detailed graphics, it would be right at home on a Nintendo console.
Demon Souls? Where the on-line integration you boast of is people leaving random notes around for each other? The Wii already has Monster Hunter Tri, which has much more involved and coordinated on-line multiplayer.
Given the overwhelming proliferation of open-world games on every console other than the Wii, I don't think Nintendo is hurting for that particular genre. Any game the Wii got would be another grain of sand on a very large beach. And again, the Wii is capable of such things. (constant game streaming was first explored in Metroid Prime, on the GameCube) There just isn't nearly as much demand for that genre on the Wii.
So for this you need an iPad (between $500 - $700) and an AppleTV ($100). So that's $600 bare minimum, for a video game solution that doesn't include any buttons, and doesn't have any dedicated hardware for the game's themselves. Not to mention that any game that you want to play multiplayer will cost you an additional $500.
As expensive as the WiiU controller looks, I seriously doubt it is going to be THAT much.
Hey, at least the Ipad and Apple TV have uses beyond just gaming, and I'm not having to shell out for useless accessories to clutter the house. And the Ipad (and "any Apple computer that can hook up to a tv") already have a huge install base that just keeps growing.
Hey, at least the Ipad and Apple TV have uses beyond just gaming, and I'm not having to shell out for useless accessories to clutter the house. And the Ipad (and "any Apple computer that can hook up to a tv") already have a huge install base that just keeps growing.
I'm not attempting to knock the iPad, or the iOS development platform in general. Being able to develop a game pretty much identically for the iPod Touch, iPhone, and iPad is really freaking awesome, made more so by Apple's much more open approach to iOS developers.
However, Apple TV is not a part of that package. And very few developers are going to produce a game designed to work in tandem with both devices. Even fewer developers are going to develop games that demand the use of multiple iPads. A little head-to-head multiplayer I could see as a bonus feature.
The strength of the original Wii was that Nintendo built the special features into the core hardware.
I want new experiences. graphics are more than fine as they are. Companies just need to let their artists be more creative.
This is exactly the sort of thing I think shit like the controller on the Wii-U hampers - depth and creativity.
One of the main reasons my faith in Nintendo has fallen over the years is that they're all about the gimmicks, or at least a large portion of what they've released over the recent years reads as such. I didn't mind the Wii, and I can sit down and enjoy myself while playing it - but there aren't near the amount of decent titles out for it I'd like - and I don't blame the developers.
The point of a console in my eyes, is to give developers an outlet, to give them the platform they need to deliver an awesome gaming experience. But Nintendo seems like they're completely working against that, their gimmicks distracting developers, sucking up precious development hours that could be spent on coming up with a great story, or a unique art style, or sense of depth, or adding polish to a product, etc - and instead those hours are spent with people having to figure out "Now how in the fuck are we going to implement this monstrosity of a controller into our gameplay?"
The Wii's a fun enough system. But a lot of what saved it was the number of games that let you use a classic controller, or were you didn't have to worry about the motion shit during play. The Wii-U seems like an extension of everything I DIDN'T like about the Wii, which topples the scale. More expensive shit we'll have to get pop-up tutorials for every 10 minutes during a game to explain how in the hell we're supposed to use the Wii-U controller/Wii remote combo just right.
Because that's real immersive.
I'm enjoying the 3DS and look forward to future games for it, but I guess my future more heavy game machine will continue to be my PC. Plenty of innovation right there, except it's coming from the developers and the games, which where it winds up being best.
This is exactly the sort of thing I think shit like the controller on the Wii-U hampers - depth and creativity.
Hmm, interesting point Listen. Reading on kotaku about Aliens: Colonial marines and their developers illustrates this perfectly; they are going out of their way to find something to do with the screen, instead of using the screen to do something they really wanted to do before but really had no idea how to go about it. Hmm.
These are all terrible examples for the point you're trying to make.
Shadow of the Colossus was produced on the PS2, and the biggest complaint in that game was how badly it chugged on the PS2's dated hardware. It probably would have been a better game if it had been designed from the ground up for the GameCube. (and would have run even better if they had ported it to the Wii)
God of War's claim to fame was a well-told story in the first game, and decently polished hack-and-slash mechanics. Every God of War since the first one has had crap stories, and very little has changed in the combat mechanics. (they're still good, but they aren't any different from the first game)
You can play a game like Heavy Rain on any console, because it's mainly just a series of glorified quick-time events. When they added Move support to it, they basically made it much more similar to most Wii games. Aside from the highly detailed graphics, it would be right at home on a Nintendo console.
Demon Souls? Where the on-line integration you boast of is people leaving random notes around for each other? The Wii already has Monster Hunter Tri, which has much more involved and coordinated on-line multiplayer.
Given the overwhelming proliferation of open-world games on every console other than the Wii, I don't think Nintendo is hurting for that particular genre. Any game the Wii got would be another grain of sand on a very large beach. And again, the Wii is capable of such things. (constant game streaming was first explored in Metroid Prime, on the GameCube) There just isn't nearly as much demand for that genre on the Wii.
So now you made a counterargument on that each of these games weren't really that good?, or that nintendo doesn't need them?
Monster hunter tri is a great example, it's a game that bypassed nintendos own online-system so that it could really shine, and you could play it using any of the controllers, there wasn't any heavy waggle integration, not to mention that the series came to life on the standard non-revolutionary and widely popular ps2.
I bought that one and wish more of those games were released on their console.
Maybe these games aren't for the wii target group.
I hope the guy who leaked the info to the press will be quartered. He is single handily responsible for ruining Nintendo's plans. From what I understand, this console shouldn't even have seen the light of day until E3 2012. They where forced into a reveal (if they would have denied it and would have revealed it next year, good chance mircosoft or sony would have come out with a similar concept earlier)because of the leaked info just like they did with the 3DS, although for that platform they had more time.
None of the hardware is final, and allot of features are still in flux, Its also why they showed 360 and ps3 footage for those third-party titles, since they where hoping for another year of preparation.
I am personally very impressed with it. I can already see various functions for it from a game design perspective, and I hope they can either clear up some stuff on gamescom, or TGC and try to repair the damage done.
I hope the guy who leaked the info to the press will be quartered. He is single handily responsible for ruining Nintendo's plans. From what I understand, this console shouldn't even have seen the light of day until E3 2012. They where forced into a reveal (if they would have denied it and would have revealed it next year, good chance mircosoft or sony would have come out with a similar concept earlier)because of the leaked info just like they did with the 3DS, although for that platform they had more time.
None of the hardware is final, and allot of features are still in flux, Its also why they showed 360 and ps3 footage for those third-party titles, since they where hoping for another year of preparation.
Where are you getting this from. Everything they have shown suggests otherwise. They showed titles that are coming out this year, what would be the point of releasing darkstalkers or BF3 6 months too late? IBM and AMD's chipsets are finalised, and I'm sure ATI will be involved again. I don't see where you are getting this, or what features 'are in flux'.
Where are you getting this from. Everything they have shown suggests otherwise. They showed titles that are coming out this year, what would be the point of releasing darkstalkers or BF3 6 months too late? IBM and AMD's chipsets are finalised, and I'm sure ATI will be involved again. I don't see where you are getting this, or what features 'are in flux'.
Bilson commented on Nintendos reluctance to reveal the systems full specs, saying some of the details are still in a state of flux.
There are still some improvements to be made to some parts of it, he said.
those titles you saw, are simply shown to give you a glimpse of what kind of software you can expect. It does not say that for example battlefield 3 (which you clearly saw footage off) which will come out October 25th, would be playable on the wiiU at that date, since the WiiU is stated for release before or at the holidays in 2012
If hardware would be final, you really think they would still keep it a secret? Gamers are wondering if the wiiU will be powerful, and from what I hear from developers, its more powerful then the ps3/360. so if the hardware would be final, then I would let everybody know what kind of badass rig the Wii U really is to put those doubts to rest.
That link proves absolutely nothing... I heard about the early-outing of the 3DS, yet heard nothing about the WiiU being outed prematurely... I really don't know where you are getting this... never mind wanting someone 'quartared' over something that didn't happen...
Yeah cutting someone into four pieces for leaking some games console nonsense is a bit excessive. I think waterboarding is the preffered method these days.
Don't take the Quartering part seriously, I mean comon, this is the community that pretty much invented penis tanks.
I don't want to get to much into an argument here since this is such a great community and its the last place I want to argue, but you should not be surprised that there are many professionals here, working in the industry. And I happen to work at a company that makes allot of games for Nintendo's handheld systems. While working at such company you hear things, and from what I see at e3, it perfectly fits the stuff I heard. and I am going to leave it at that.
Replies
Well uhh... hes probably been playing with a dev kit for a while now?
Believe me, I want this thing to be the most powerful console on the market, so there can be multiplatform titles on it, but I'm just going by what I've read.
They again putting too much on new control method (aka gimmickry) and not enough of third party support and power into the console, as far as I can make out it's going to be ps3/360 level, so why on earth would I want to buy this PoS when I have both of those + a pc ... I've had enough of mario over the last 10+ years and unless they bring something new to the table there is no point.
Also, unreal-engine 3 will be running on it too considering arkam city will be released for the platform.
And since we are expecting a pretty similar platform to the 360 and ps3 in terms of performance, it would be strange of it to have less memory than those.
Uh, Wii comes out with motion control and then MS and Sony come out with motion control. If that's not being ahead of the curve, I don't know what is.
"Better graphics" does not equal innovation.
What you describe as a 'gimmick' is the thing that made the Nintendo Wii stand out and sell better than its competitors.
For all intents and purposes, an Xbox 360 and a Playstation 3 are the same thing. Yeah, PS3 has blu-ray and the online services aren't identical, but if you want to play Assassin's Creed or Arkham Asylum, you can play it on either system with essentially no difference. Same look same feel, same inputs, etc. That's two consoles dedicated to high-end tech and 'hardcore' gamer experiences. Why should Nintendo try doing that? Do we really need a third console that's attempting to do what the other two do?
If what you want out of your next generation of consoles is simply more power, there are already two options out there for you. Nintendo's just not for you.
so its like an ipad with better controls that controls a console connected to a TV...but doesnt nessecairly need the TV...bam i get it...
i have a console... i have an Ipad...and i have a girlfriend...sometimes the two are NOT compatable....
also you can think about it like this its a DS for the home... with decent graphics capabitlitys...
i just hope that the controller is a bit better looking at the moment its a bit playschool
It did sell better but for many reasons the overall game sales have been better on the other platforms, luckily they sold the console at a profit, but they never pushed more games than the other platforms.
The name of the console could've essentially been wii sports.
playstation network and xbox live has done (dare I say it) a lot more for gaming than the wii-mote has, not to mention that both sony and microsoft have much healthier relationships with indie-developers.
All the local multiplayer potential crushed in an instant.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/306087/news/wii-u-console-and-controller-wont-be-sold-separately/
Not actually true. In terms of cross-platform games, it is true that the Wii versions pretty much never sold as well as their PS3/360 equivalents. But a LOT of Wii-exclusive titles pushed more units than games on the other platforms. And not just Nintendo titles, either. Just Dance is one of the stand-out third party success stories of this console generation.
It just goes to show how effective properly targeted development can be. If you are trying to pitch Call of Duty on a console who's primary user base is small children and the parents of small children, you're going to come up short. Produce an accessible family-friendly dancing game on the same platform, and you're rolling in cash.
The danger of the WiiU is not whether or not it can sell games. It's whether or not Nintendo can actually appeal to the teens and young adults who have embraced the Playstation and XBox brands. A lot of that crowd was raised in an environment where "Playstation" was synonymous with "video games," and where the XBox hosted the first multiplayer shooter they ever knew.
A lot of the Wii crowd are now parents with less free time and children to think about. Those people grew up in the age of Nintendo, and trust Nintendo to provide child-friendly games that can still appeal to adults. They are also more susceptible to nostalgia, and actually prefer for Nintendo to take advantage of that. With the Wii, Nintendo managed to appeal directly to this demographic, while reaching out to other groups.
The danger of the WiiU is that Nintendo might be overreaching. They have their cake, and now they want everyone else's cake as well. I don't think it will be difficult to sell current Wii owners on the WiiU. But drawing in teenagers and young adults is going to be a much steeper challenge.
I know there were great hits on the wii, even obscure anti soccer-mum games like monster hunter tri hit quite nice.
But it still remains the fact that your average wii owner will be buying less games than your average 360/ps3 owner.
That's the thing nintendo wants now, they've made a fantastic success in reaching out to markets that were unreachable, but these markets aren't into buying games in the same scope the 'hardcore' market is.
Nintendo does one thing fantastically right, they are very strong on backwards-compatibility.
I'm not so sure. And if this turns out to be less of an issue than expected, Sony and Microsoft are to blame.
Local multiplayer has become the realm of casual party games. It has also become the realm of the Wii. The Wii has from the beginning embraced local multiplayer, and a lot of games have been built for it that take advantage of local multiplayer. It is well know as the "party" system.
The PS3 and 360 both have a much stronger focus on internet multiplayer. If you are playing the latest shooter, you do your multiplayer on-line. There are even some games produced for those systems that don't have ANY local multiplayer, preferring to focus on the on-line component.
For on-line multiplayer, you only need one PS3/360 equivalent controller. (the WiiPad) So only having one WiiPad per system isn't going to damage on-line multiplayer in the slightest, or prevent any of the 3rd-party ports from coming to the WiiU.
It is sad that we won't be able to enjoy touch screen games locally. But it won't be a difficult up-sell for existing Wii owners. Their current accessories will still be useful.
That's a fair assessment. It is immaterial from Nintendo's perspective, since most of those few games are published by them. And of course, the fact that they make a profit off of their hardware insures that they are making money even if NO games are purchased. (part of the reason why the Wii was such a huge success)
And of course, that's why they are trying to get more "hardcore" gamers with the WiiU. They already have the casual market sewn up. Up-selling existing Wii owners on the WiiU is going to be a walk in the park. Expanding into Playstation-era demographics is going to be much more of a challenge.
One big bane of local gaming is that you always had to either design the game around everyone being aware of everything that's going on, even in split-screen games where you wouldn't want it.
Wow. If this turns out to be true, that is a colossal fuckup on Nintendo's part. some of the best possibilities involve multiple players having access to separate screens. Maybe the PR guy was just confused, and meant it's not sold as a stand-alone device.
is it though? I know a lot of people who bought thw Wii for the fun/novelty factor or whatever and none of them still actually use it (well except for my mother-in-law but only for netflix). I don't know if there's any way to track how many people actully use their Wii's but I'm pretty sure that most of them will think about how much dust it's collected before they go and buy the WiiU.
Oh, I have thought about it. And I'm very sad that it isn't going to be feasible with the WiiU and its one-pad-per-console approach. It was the first place my mind went when I heard they were including a screen on the controller, and I'm sure a lot of other gamers were thinking the same thing.
At the same time, I'm also thinking about a real-time playable version of Dungeons and Dragons where the guy with the tablet is the dungeon master. There is still a lot of potential for local multiplayer with this concept. It's not the same kind of potential, but it's still there.
And how many of those people were between the ages of 17-30? And how many of them will be snagged once again by the fun/novelty of another Nintendo console that is once again doing something different?
It is easy to question the longevity of the Wii. But then, Nintendo just announced its successor. They weren't expecting it to last as long as either the 360 or PS3. Hell, they probably didn't have any idea that it would do as well as it has. I think its quite canny that they are billing the WiiU as an extension of the successful Wii branding. Even if there are Wiis collecting dust right now, that doesn't negate the positive response that it got when it was novel and fresh.
Of course, that's also where the price becomes a major factor. Novel and fresh is a lot easier to swallow when it is inexpensive. Nintendo needs to keep the cost of the WiiU closer to impulse levels. And that's not going to be easy with the current lowered prices of the 360 and PS3. It's true that the situation at present is far different from when the Wii launched. There is still no guaranteed success for the WiiU.
http://wii.ign.com/articles/117/1174333p1.html
The bandwith is probably the problem, streaming all the that information, high def visuals lots of analog controls would put the strain on any wifi(if it is wifi),even for just a single controller.
Nintendo needs to cut the bullshit. I didn't mind the Wii, my wife and I still sit down to play it every other night or so (though we held off on buying that, too, so we've still got games we don't have or haven't gotten through). But the Wii U I'll likely be skipping over.
It may have more to do with not being able to render all those images and stream them as well. Having to render an HD main image + 4 480p(or whatever res it is) images is quite a bit.
Shameless stolen from another forum (not even sure if it's 100% legit).
Rendering could be dirt cheap, it's all depending on what it has to render, split screen has been done before, it wouldn't have to be full resolution, nor do I suspect the pad is even HD.
I can't see bandwidth as being an issue either.
I think this boils down to some other reasons, like the amount of money people would have to put into the wiiU to have a full family multiplayer experience, and the disappointment of that family when their children realizes only one of these new 'gameboys' can actually play a singleplayer game at the same time.
Nintendo wants to be seen as the family friendly company first and foremost, this is why online had previously suffered so much in such a similar fashion.
Hadn't thought about that, but you make a good point. It's just very disappointing to think that the best thing about the WiiU is essentially single-player only. I guess that's the 'U' they were talking about, since it's not really a 'We' console out of the box.
Why do they need to "cut the bullshit"? They won this generation in hardware sales, hands down.
I completely disagree. I wasn't a huge fan of the Wii (latency problems on the controller pissed me off), but at least Nintendo had the balls to go out and do something different, and they're doing it again. At least someone is.
I don't simply want xbox 720 and ps4,5, and 6, because without Nintendo they'd most likely be the same shit with better graphics. I want new experiences. graphics are more than fine as they are. Companies just need to let their artists be more creative.
Where can I play a game like heavy rain on it.
How will I get a seamless online experience like in demons souls on the wii.
Where are the huge openworld elderscrolls equalents on the wii?
I could go on forever, but do know that in calling every other console off as unimaginative, or not different enough would look past the fact that these companies have made solid consoles for the third party developers to make beautiful solid game experience sans any kind of superfluous input method.
I'd like to see Nintendo have some balls to do that, maybe with their new platform they have.
I think everyone here on this forum would love to get way more swinging room on future consoles, especially in terms of memory.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/08/real-racing-2-hd-beats-wii-u-to-the-wireless-dual-screen-gaming/
These are all terrible examples for the point you're trying to make.
Shadow of the Colossus was produced on the PS2, and the biggest complaint in that game was how badly it chugged on the PS2's dated hardware. It probably would have been a better game if it had been designed from the ground up for the GameCube. (and would have run even better if they had ported it to the Wii)
God of War's claim to fame was a well-told story in the first game, and decently polished hack-and-slash mechanics. Every God of War since the first one has had crap stories, and very little has changed in the combat mechanics. (they're still good, but they aren't any different from the first game)
You can play a game like Heavy Rain on any console, because it's mainly just a series of glorified quick-time events. When they added Move support to it, they basically made it much more similar to most Wii games. Aside from the highly detailed graphics, it would be right at home on a Nintendo console.
Demon Souls? Where the on-line integration you boast of is people leaving random notes around for each other? The Wii already has Monster Hunter Tri, which has much more involved and coordinated on-line multiplayer.
Given the overwhelming proliferation of open-world games on every console other than the Wii, I don't think Nintendo is hurting for that particular genre. Any game the Wii got would be another grain of sand on a very large beach. And again, the Wii is capable of such things. (constant game streaming was first explored in Metroid Prime, on the GameCube) There just isn't nearly as much demand for that genre on the Wii.
Seriously? Crushed?
So for this you need an iPad (between $500 - $700) and an AppleTV ($100). So that's $600 bare minimum, for a video game solution that doesn't include any buttons, and doesn't have any dedicated hardware for the game's themselves. Not to mention that any game that you want to play multiplayer will cost you an additional $500.
As expensive as the WiiU controller looks, I seriously doubt it is going to be THAT much.
I'm not attempting to knock the iPad, or the iOS development platform in general. Being able to develop a game pretty much identically for the iPod Touch, iPhone, and iPad is really freaking awesome, made more so by Apple's much more open approach to iOS developers.
However, Apple TV is not a part of that package. And very few developers are going to produce a game designed to work in tandem with both devices. Even fewer developers are going to develop games that demand the use of multiple iPads. A little head-to-head multiplayer I could see as a bonus feature.
The strength of the original Wii was that Nintendo built the special features into the core hardware.
wat?
Never ever heard that complaint before, nor experienced it , neither on a phat or slim PS2.
This is exactly the sort of thing I think shit like the controller on the Wii-U hampers - depth and creativity.
One of the main reasons my faith in Nintendo has fallen over the years is that they're all about the gimmicks, or at least a large portion of what they've released over the recent years reads as such. I didn't mind the Wii, and I can sit down and enjoy myself while playing it - but there aren't near the amount of decent titles out for it I'd like - and I don't blame the developers.
The point of a console in my eyes, is to give developers an outlet, to give them the platform they need to deliver an awesome gaming experience. But Nintendo seems like they're completely working against that, their gimmicks distracting developers, sucking up precious development hours that could be spent on coming up with a great story, or a unique art style, or sense of depth, or adding polish to a product, etc - and instead those hours are spent with people having to figure out "Now how in the fuck are we going to implement this monstrosity of a controller into our gameplay?"
The Wii's a fun enough system. But a lot of what saved it was the number of games that let you use a classic controller, or were you didn't have to worry about the motion shit during play. The Wii-U seems like an extension of everything I DIDN'T like about the Wii, which topples the scale. More expensive shit we'll have to get pop-up tutorials for every 10 minutes during a game to explain how in the hell we're supposed to use the Wii-U controller/Wii remote combo just right.
Because that's real immersive.
I'm enjoying the 3DS and look forward to future games for it, but I guess my future more heavy game machine will continue to be my PC. Plenty of innovation right there, except it's coming from the developers and the games, which where it winds up being best.
Hmm, interesting point Listen. Reading on kotaku about Aliens: Colonial marines and their developers illustrates this perfectly; they are going out of their way to find something to do with the screen, instead of using the screen to do something they really wanted to do before but really had no idea how to go about it. Hmm.
Yeah i had a brain fart reading that
So now you made a counterargument on that each of these games weren't really that good?, or that nintendo doesn't need them?
Monster hunter tri is a great example, it's a game that bypassed nintendos own online-system so that it could really shine, and you could play it using any of the controllers, there wasn't any heavy waggle integration, not to mention that the series came to life on the standard non-revolutionary and widely popular ps2.
I bought that one and wish more of those games were released on their console.
Maybe these games aren't for the wii target group.
None of the hardware is final, and allot of features are still in flux, Its also why they showed 360 and ps3 footage for those third-party titles, since they where hoping for another year of preparation.
I am personally very impressed with it. I can already see various functions for it from a game design perspective, and I hope they can either clear up some stuff on gamescom, or TGC and try to repair the damage done.
Where are you getting this from. Everything they have shown suggests otherwise. They showed titles that are coming out this year, what would be the point of releasing darkstalkers or BF3 6 months too late? IBM and AMD's chipsets are finalised, and I'm sure ATI will be involved again. I don't see where you are getting this, or what features 'are in flux'.
http://www.vg247.com/2011/06/09/darksiders-2-already-running-on-wii-u/
those titles you saw, are simply shown to give you a glimpse of what kind of software you can expect. It does not say that for example battlefield 3 (which you clearly saw footage off) which will come out October 25th, would be playable on the wiiU at that date, since the WiiU is stated for release before or at the holidays in 2012
If hardware would be final, you really think they would still keep it a secret? Gamers are wondering if the wiiU will be powerful, and from what I hear from developers, its more powerful then the ps3/360. so if the hardware would be final, then I would let everybody know what kind of badass rig the Wii U really is to put those doubts to rest.
I don't want to get to much into an argument here since this is such a great community and its the last place I want to argue, but you should not be surprised that there are many professionals here, working in the industry. And I happen to work at a company that makes allot of games for Nintendo's handheld systems. While working at such company you hear things, and from what I see at e3, it perfectly fits the stuff I heard. and I am going to leave it at that.
Aaanndd it's a cliffhanger.. =[