Support NeoGAF

-Pyromaniac- · Mar 17, 2012

I'll say what I've said time and time again. I want a stronger console than "2x", duh. But IF the Wii-U were to be only that much stronger overall, I won't mind so much AS LONG AS THE PRICE REFLECTS IT. But if they release a console that isn't that big of a leap at all, and then have the gall to charge a large amount for it, then fuckem. I'll wait for the meltdown/price drop or something.

With that said, if the price is aggressive and reflects the fact that it isn't a huge leap, then all is well.

Log4Girlz · Mar 17, 2012

2x the power of 360 is at least better than my worst case scenario (being ever so slightly less powerful but with more RAM, balancing it out).

AceBandage · Mar 17, 2012

EvilDick34 said:
How am i trolling? Because i stated my fear of Nintendo going cheap again? Stop being lazy Ace, you are the one trolling.

Cheap again... Doesn't even make sense, son.
Why would you even buy a console period then?
If graphics are your most important part, then consoles aren't for you, regardless of who makes them.

Cmd. Pishad'aç · Mar 17, 2012

2X the power of the 360 doesn't go against recent comments from game developers, saying they were pushing Nintendo to beef up Wii U specs and they were listening ?

A Wii U that fits performance wise in the current gen, is not in tune with this statements.

Nintendo gotta secure x720 ports. PS4 will be something in a league of its own I suspect, not worth to bother with it.

Azure J · Mar 17, 2012

One thing to keep in mind regarding the GPU created for Wii U, a lower SPU number isn't always a bad thing if they're all efficient. I learned this from watching the 77x0 cards out now and have high hopes that due to the more modern processes used to make the part, the chip will be a contender.

That being said, I was kinda pulling for a 5770 equivalent when all was said and done.

nordique · Mar 17, 2012

Refreshment.01 said:
So after 6/7 years you think is alright to expect a 2x jump? Basically in that scenario the WiiU is relegated to the same experiences possible in this generation of consoles. Im talking about the experiences that are influenced by processing power more tan the input device. That doesn't seem good enough and again way behind the expectations of transitioning to a new cycle of consoles. It will hurt the company in the long run, we should remember this devices are expected to have a shelf life of 4/5 years.

This is a good question.

But I think Nintendo is very aware of what cost them the long term mindshare with the current generation of consoles. We all seem to have a habit of underestimating them when it comes to hardware, simply because we assume their Wii hardware philosophy is their gold standard, when in fact Nintendo likes to balance everything. This GPU series was released in the early part of 2010 I believe, and there have not been any grand drastic changes to GPU technology in the last few years unlike the change that happened when the "HD shift" occurred with the shaders and all.

Keep in mind, Nintendo is releasing a console for the mass market's wallet, and for their profitability. There is so much more that goes on with a console release that it takes years of planning in advance on so many different levels.

If this info proves to be accurate (and I don't have any reason to doubt wsippel) then this GPU is on the weaker side of what I was expecting, but still in the range of what I was expecting, and is not at all a bad fit. Its powerful enough. And this was on a June 09-2011 timeline. Much can change within those months, and we all know the devkits are still ever evolving.

wsippel has stated there are newer versions of kits out since this chip would likely have been completed, and its possible that smaller tweaks can be done here and there.

I wouldn't expect any drastic changes but this level of GPU at ~2x Xenos raw power makes sense, fits with what we've heard from credible rumours and sources, and doesn't discredit the direction consoles are likely heading in at all.

And, the mention of GDDR5 is nice

EvilDick34 · Mar 17, 2012

AceBandage said:
Cheap again... Doesn't even make sense, son.
Why would you even buy a console period then?
If graphics are your most important part, then consoles aren't for you, regardless of who makes them.

Where did i say graphics are the most important part Ace? I said i like Graphics, that is it. Please don't make up stuff i didn't say, Mmmk? Are you denying that Nintendo went cheap on the Nintendo Wii? Anyone other then the most ardent Nintendo supporter(I'm one of their biggest fans, i have owned every one of their consoles/portables except the micro and virtual boy)would tell you they went super cheap with the Wii, it's not even HD or did you selectively forget that? and don't call me son, kiddo.

stupidvillager · Mar 17, 2012

Ok, honest question because I really dont have any idea. Why would AMD need SocTronics in helping design a GPU. This isnt there first go around, nor is it Nintendos.

Glorified G · Mar 17, 2012

Refreshment.01 said:
So after 6/7 years you think is alright to expect a 2x jump? Basically in that scenario the WiiU is relegated to the same experiences possible in this generation of consoles. Im talking about the experiences that are influenced by processing power more tan the input device. That doesn't seem good enough and again way behind the expectations of transitioning to a new cycle of consoles. It will hurt the company in the long run, we should remember this devices are expected to have a shelf life of 4/5 years.

What would be cool is if NIntendo or any other company would found a clever solution to do a console hardware update near 1/2 of the system's life. ANd yes, i m aware of the consequences of doing this type of stunt, that's why i said a "clever" way

To me it's all about price. They could put whatever they want in it as long as it's priced accordingly. $249-$299

AceBandage · Mar 17, 2012

EvilDick34 said:
Where did i say graphics are the most important part Ace? I said i like Graphics, that is it. Please don't make up stuff i didn't say, Mmmk? Are you denying that Nintendo went cheap on the Nintendo Wii? Anyone other then the most ardent Nintendo supporter(I'm one of their biggest fans, i have owned every one of their consoles/portables except the micro and virtual boy)would tell you they went super cheap with the Wii, it's not even HD or did you selectively forget that? and don't call me son, kiddo.

Yeah, they went cheap.
And that was reflected in the end price for consumers.
In fact, many people argue that they sold it for too little, considering what happened after launch.
It's not like they were charging $400+ for the Wii.
They charged a modest $250 with a packed in game.

Again, if graphics are so important, then stay away from consoles.
Simple. As. That.

TwilightPrincess · Mar 17, 2012

Ideaman, please say something about wsippels finding

EloquentM · Mar 17, 2012

just 80 more days and we'll know exactly what to expect. wsippel's detective work is notable but it still doesn't say much about what we'll be seeing on this system (especially if it has a noticeable upgrade in RAM). I personally am waiting for e3 before I get disappointed or excited in all of this.

Oddduck · Mar 17, 2012

If it turns out that the Wii U is only 2x more powerful than Wii U, it better be $300 or less. If it's only a little more powerful than 360/PS3, then it should be priced like a 360/PS3.

Expensive controller technology be damned. If your console is going to compete with 360/PS3, then it should be priced like 360/PS3.

Roo · Mar 17, 2012

Glorified G said:
To me it's all about price. They could put whatever they want in it as long as it's priced accordingly. $249-$299

We both know that's not going to happen

EvilDick34 · Mar 17, 2012

AceBandage said:
Yeah, they went cheap.
And that was reflected in the end price for consumers.
In fact, many people argue that they sold it for too little, considering what happened after launch.
It's not like they were charging $400+ for the Wii.
They charged a modest $250 with a packed in game.

Again, if graphics are so important, then stay away from consoles.
Simple. As. That.

Who are these people Ace that think Nintendo charged to little for such an underpowered console? I think and i think most people would agree Nintendo should have charged 200 for it considering the tech packed in.

Again Ace, I said i like graphics...not that it is the be all end all for my decision on why i buy i something, please explain to me why you are failing at reading my posts correctly? You are trying to hard here. In fact when i build my PC's I typically aim for a build that is economical yet packs a good punch without being top of the line.

AceBandage · Mar 17, 2012

EvilDick34 said:
Again Ace, I said i like graphics...not that it is the be all end all for my decision on why i buy i something, please explain to me why you are failing at reading my posts correctly? You are trying to hard here. In fact when i build my PC's typically i am for a build that is economical yet packs a good punch without being top of the line.

Then why even bring it up? If they price it accordingly to what's in it, why are you groaning and moaning about them being "CHEAP AS FUCK!"
That is why your statement came off as trolling.

Lupin the Third · Mar 17, 2012

Oddduck said:
If it turns out that the Wii U is only 2x more powerful than Wii U, it better be $300 or less. If it's only a little more powerful than 360/PS3, then it should be priced a little more than a 360/PS3.

Fixed that for you.

Log4Girlz · Mar 17, 2012

Oddduck said:
If it turns out that the Wii U is only 2x more powerful than Wii U, it better be $300 or less. If it's only a little more powerful than 360/PS3, then it should be priced like a 360/PS3.

Expensive controller technology be damned.

$349.99 min.

EvilDick34 · Mar 17, 2012

AceBandage said:
Then why even bring it up? If they price it accordingly to what's in it, why are you groaning and moaning about them being "CHEAP AS FUCK!"
That is why your statement came off as trolling.

Because they we're being cheap as fuck? They easily could have gone HD but they didn't, simple as that Ace. I'm done with your troll attempts.

Edited to add that yet again you ignore that the Wii is based off gamecube tech! How was the Wii priced accordingly? That thing could have been sold for 150 i bet.

Oddduck · Mar 17, 2012

Log4Girlz said:
$349.99 min.

PS3/360 will probably get price cuts when Wii U comes out.

$350 is suicide for the Wii U if the Wii U technology isn't vastly superior.

Roo · Mar 17, 2012

Log4Girlz said:
$349.99 min.

Pretty much...

I'm willing to pay $400 if it's worth it

pieatorium · Mar 17, 2012

stupidvillager said:
Ok, honest question because I really dont have any idea. Why would AMD need SocTronics in helping design a GPU. This isnt there first go around, nor is it Nintendos.

looking into it head of AMD India is also founder of this company for whatever that means.

AceBandage · Mar 17, 2012

EvilDick34 said:
Because they we're being cheap as fuck? They easily could have gone HD but they didn't, simple as that Ace. I'm done with your troll attempts.

They could have, yes.
But they didn't.
It's not because they're cheap, it's because they went for something completely different.
And it worked out pretty damn well for them.

EvilDick34 said:
Edited to add that yet again you ignore that the Wii is based off gamecube tech! How was the Wii priced accordingly? That thing could have been sold for 150 i bet.

It wasn't a GameCube, though.
I mean, hell. The 360 is "based" on GameCube tech.

And it doesn't matter anyway.
People were paying $400+ for the thing. You couldn't find it in stores for nearly two years.
It wasn't outrageously priced for what it offered, the market decided that very early.
Sorry that it didn't live up to your standards, but it wasn't just Nintendo being "cheap as fuck".

Door2Dawn · Mar 17, 2012

Oddduck said:
PS3/360 will probably get price cuts when Wii U comes out.

$350 is suicide for the Wii U if the Wii U technology isn't vastly superior.

Uh but the tech is vastly superior

A.KU.MU · Mar 17, 2012

The one thing I really, really want to change is the slider pads. Traditional analog sticks ftw!

nordique · Mar 17, 2012

EvilDick34 said:
Because they we're being cheap as fuck? They easily could have gone HD but they didn't, simple as that Ace. I'm done with your troll attempts.

Edited to add that yet again you ignore that the Wii is based off gamecube tech! How was the Wii priced accordingly? That thing could have been sold for 150 i bet.

Its not as simple as that man. The Wii was not just a repackaged GameCube, and if you don't understand that and how the pricing works on a multitude of levels, you really shouldn't be so strong with your words.

EvilDick34 · Mar 17, 2012

AceBandage said:
They could have, yes.
But they didn't.
It's not because they're cheap, it's because they went for something completely different.
And it worked out pretty damn well for them.

It wasn't a GameCube, though.
I mean, hell. The 360 is "based" on GameCube tech.

Well, we certainly will agree on the point that Nintendo is always the innovator in the video game sector, it is one of the reasons i love them. I don't think it worked out very well for them in the long term. Look at the Wii right now, it has lost all the momentum and is for all intent and purpose, dead.

TwilightPrincess · Mar 17, 2012

Oddduck said:
If it turns out that the Wii U is only 2x more powerful than Wii U, it better be $300 or less. If it's only a little more powerful than 360/PS3, then it should be priced like a 360/PS3.

Expensive controller technology be damned. If your console is going to compete with 360/PS3, then it should be priced like 360/PS3.

That´s the more powerful Premium Version, 2 WiiU consoles duct taped together

Oddduck · Mar 17, 2012

Door2Dawn said:
Uh but the tech is vastly superior

I didn't say it is or isn't. I'm saying if it isn't vastly superior, then that means Wii U is competing with 360/PS3's market, not next gen.

Sony PlayStation 3 160GB at $250 right now at Gamestop.

http://www.gamestop.com/ps3/consoles/sony-playstation-3-160gb/92398

Sony could drop that price to $200 when Wii U comes out.

IF, and this is a big IF, Nintendo releases a console that is only a little more powerful than PS3, and they price it at $350, you're asking for Wii U to flop on its face.

SolidSnakex · Mar 17, 2012

Oddduck said:
PS3/360 will probably get price cuts when Wii U comes out.

$350 is suicide for the Wii U if the Wii U technology isn't vastly superior.

I don't think so. There really isn't a scenario where I can see MS or Sony launching their new systems at a lower price than what Nintendo could have the Wii U at by the time that either of those systems launch. So they're always going to be at an advantage when it comes to pricing. But I think the 3DS launch will make Nintendo think long and hard about the pricing of the Wii U. It seems like they want it to get off to a fast and smooth start (much like the Wii) instead of having to deal go through a down period. $300 would probably do that.

AceBandage · Mar 17, 2012

EvilDick34 said:
Well, we certainly will agree on the point that Nintendo is always the innovator in the video game sector, it is one of the reasons i love them. I don't think it worked out very well for them in the long term. Look at the Wii right now, it has lost all the momentum and is for all intent and purpose, dead.

The Wii lost a majority of its momentum due to Nintendo's mishandling of it starting in 2008, when they refused to up production on internal games and secure exclusives.
They tried to fix this later, but it was too late.
It had little to do with the system's actual power.

EloquentM · Mar 17, 2012

AceBandage said:
The Wii lost a majority of its momentum due to Nintendo's mishandling of it starting in 2008, when they refused to up production on internal games and secure exclusives.
They tried to fix this later, but it was too late.
It had little to do with the system's actual power.

and everything to do with a drought of games

*cries*

Strife91 · Mar 17, 2012

If it's only 2x more powerful than 360, I don't want to pay more than 250.

herzogzwei1989 · Mar 17, 2012

wsippel said:
I'm not reaching far, I'm connecting dots:

The Wii U GPU was in the works at AMD Hyderabad from June 2009 to June 2011

SoCtronics worked with AMD Hyderabad from 2009 to June 2011

SoCtronics worked with AMD on the GPU I described

The GPU in question is not available at retail and doesn't match any off-the-shelf AMD GPU

That's really interesting stuff about the GPU.

Edit: I VERY much hope there are 16 ROPs, not 8 like Xenos and RSX.

EvilDick34 · Mar 17, 2012

AceBandage said:
The Wii lost a majority of its momentum due to Nintendo's mishandling of it starting in 2008, when they refused to up production on internal games and secure exclusives.
They tried to fix this later, but it was too late.
It had little to do with the system's actual power.

How we're they going to fix things. Most devs used the excuse that it was too underpowered for them to invest in it, look at Epic.

EloquentM · Mar 17, 2012

Speculation thread of we still no next to nothing, lets continue to complain. nintendo is to blame though. they should have just kept the wii u in the dark for another year to be unveiled at this years e3. scratch that, I think getting exposure for the console benefited them quite a bit. in theory it should have allowed them to adjust their expectations of what they want to see in their next console.

EvilDick34 said:
How we're they going to fix things. Most devs used the excuse that it was too underpowered for them to invest in it, look at Epic.

the way I see it is the only way they could fix things is by improving upon their game output and online infrastructure with this upcoming gen.

Log4Girlz · Mar 17, 2012

EvilDick34 said:
Because they we're being cheap as fuck? They easily could have gone HD but they didn't, simple as that Ace. I'm done with your troll attempts.

Edited to add that yet again you ignore that the Wii is based off gamecube tech! How was the Wii priced accordingly? That thing could have been sold for 150 i bet.

Wii wasn't priced accordingly? It should have been $299 in retrospect.

AceBandage · Mar 17, 2012

EvilDick34 said:
How we're they going to fix things. Most devs used the excuse that it was too underpowered for them to invest in it, look at Epic.

Devs have an entire booklet of excuses for why they don't create games.
The power was only one of them.
Yes, if the Wii could have gotten third party multiplatform games, it would have been beneficial, but it wouldn't have stemmed the main problem.
That being that Nintendo sat on their hands for nearly two years, expecting publishers to jump right on the Wii, rather than actively seeking them out.

They aren't taking that chance this time, as seen by the 3DS and E3. They are going to large publishers and saying "We need you. And we need you day one."

The lack of power was merely a symptom to the over all disease of what happened with the Wii.

Oddduck · Mar 17, 2012

EloquentM said:
Speculation thread of we still no next to nothing, lets continue to complain. nintendo is to blame though. they should have just kept the wii u in the dark for another year to be unveiled at this years e3. scratch that, I think getting exposure for the console benefited them quite a bit. in theory it should have allowed them to adjust their expectations of what they want to see in their next console.

I agree.

People bash Michael Pachter, but when Pachter calls Wii U Nintendo's Dreamcast, or saying "It's just a 360 with a touchscreen", then it's actually good for Nintendo gamers.

It puts more pressure on Nintendo to prove the mainstream media wrong. It forces Nintendo to try harder to impress.

Nintendo is best when they are under pressure.

nordique · Mar 17, 2012

Oddduck said:
I didn't say it is or isn't. I'm saying if it isn't vastly superior, then that means Wii U is competing with 360/PS3's market, not next gen.

Sony PlayStation 3 160GB at $250 right now at Gamestop.

http://www.gamestop.com/ps3/consoles/sony-playstation-3-160gb/92398

Sony could drop that price to $200 when Wii U comes out.

IF, and this is a big IF, Nintendo releases a console that is only a little more powerful than PS3, and they price it at $350, you're asking for Wii U to flop on its face.

The new input method is a really big potential sales driver. We don't know what impact that could have on attracting the general populous or previous Wii market.

Looking at it solely from a "tech" perspective is not correct, as you are stating. This is because every Nintendo handheld and the Wii disproved that.

It may be overstated by now, but the Wii was a console that was more-so in league with the previous generation of consoles technically than the other current generation, but that didn't stop the Wii from breaking sales records and lapping the 360 several times over.

This generation, the clear "winner" was Nintendo, no matter how its dissected. They won not only in terms of sales, but also more importantly in terms of profit.

So my point is it could be argued that if the Wii wasn't vastly superior to the PS2/GC/XBox techwise and it was priced higher (which it was relatively when it was released) then it could flop.

But it didn't. Why? Because *Graphics* Tech is not what wins the sales, its not what makes the profit. The Wii Remote sold the Wii, and although it may not seem like the Upad could do much in a day and age of iPads and touchscreen smart phones plastered to the general consumer's mindshare, I still wouldn't count Nintendo out.

On a business level, Nintendo is one of the smartest companies out there.

herzogzwei1989 · Mar 17, 2012

nordique said:
Its not as simple as that man. The Wii was not just a repackaged GameCube, and if you don't understand that and how the pricing works on a multitude of levels, you really shouldn't be so strong with your words.

Wii was a 50% faster GameCube with 3.6x more fast RAM (88 divided by 24). Not counting GameCube's 16 MB of extremely slow "ARAM"/DRAM. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Roo · Mar 17, 2012

Oddduck said:
I didn't say it is or isn't. I'm saying if it isn't vastly superior, then that means Wii U is competing with 360/PS3's market, not next gen.

Sony PlayStation 3 160GB at $250 right now at Gamestop.

http://www.gamestop.com/ps3/consoles/sony-playstation-3-160gb/92398

Sony could drop that price to $200 when Wii U comes out.

IF, and this is a big IF, Nintendo releases a console that is only a little more powerful than PS3, and they price it at $350, you're asking for Wii U to flop on its face.

But you are not considering a few things. Since Wii U is the first console of the next generation, it is somehow stuck between this and the next gen. It just can't be priced the same like old technology... it just can't be.

Besides, if they price it at or above $350 they can totally get a price drop when either the PS4 or nextXbox arrive and then recover sales. The same way people goes "Why would I buy a Wii U when I can buy a PS3 half the price?" can work for Wii U and Sony and Microsoft next consoles

At the end, it comes to games, and Nintendo has the best system sellers so if what they said about a huge tide of Wii U and 3DS games for the holiday season is true, then I think they can get away with a high price

Oddduck · Mar 17, 2012

nordique said:
The new input method is a really big potential sales driver. We don't know what impact that could have on attracting the general populous or previous Wii market.

They just need to be careful because lightning doesn't always strike twice. And if it does strike twice, it might not strike as hard as the Wii's sales.

Also, casual gamers don't buy games as much as hardcore gamers.

IdeaMan · Mar 17, 2012

pieatorium said:
It would also sort of fit what that arkham guy said about features but not really powerfull, although I think it's pretty clear that his stuff was all based of older kits compared to everything else we have heard.

I'll quote myself:

If people thought about that because they hope that arkam (and maybe some other developers) statements that lead them to think the Wii U will be underpowered is a consequence of a v1 dev kit being used by its studio, then: Maybe its team had v3 dev kit at the time, and they have met less difficulty with the v4 one since then. But, what he said rely MUCH more on other parameters: what its studio was trying to do/achieve with the dev kit, what kind of use they have of the padlet, what is their approach of the graphical/engine part of their project on Wii U: if it's a port of an existing engine, at what time his impressions were made, when the engine was not optimized at all or not, etc, etc.

_________________

aeroslash said:
Yes, but if we take into account the second screen as discussed before, we may be looking at a console with a graphics output slightly better than x360, which in my opinion would be suicidal.

For several third-parties ports, from what i know, this will be the case. If people are expecting all the Wii U versions of current gen HD games, available at or soon after the launch, to run at 1080p 60fps (or even 30fps) with a lot of AA, etc, they will be disappointed. This is in a specific context though (third party ports, v4/v5 dev kit power range, rather intensive use of the padlet - more than 2d inventory & map, etc.).

___________________

Log4Girlz said:
2x the power of 360 is at least better than my worst case scenario (being ever so slightly less powerful but with more RAM, balancing it out).

It will NOT happen, period. It's really a fact.

____________________

For all the wsippel interesting investigations concerning the GPU since a few days:

From what i can say, there were changes made on the GPU well after June 2011. Now, are we talking about "small" tweaking like boost of frequency, or more intricate modifications that concerns the chip design, i don't know. Is it possible for Nintendo to add a feature (like an improved tesselator), add more SPU, etc, without having to change the GPU too heavily, the board circuitry, bus, all the other components even slightly (because i guess the result must be balanced) ? And if they weren't satisfied and/or under the pressure of developers to boost the hardware, is it possible for them to choose another version of the GPU rather than trying to modifying it too much, this "late" in development ? In regard to videogames history, they can, but i don't know if it's the case here.

AceBandage · Mar 17, 2012

herzogzwei1989 said:
Wii was a 50% faster GameCube with 3.6x more fast RAM (88 divided by 24). Not counting GameCube's 16 MB of extremely slow "ARAM"/DRAM. Correct me if I'm wrong.

It also had built in WiFi receivers, a slot loading DVD drive, multiple ports and what not that the GC didn't, an actual functional OS...
Looking at just the RAM and clock speeds gives you nothing on the unit cost.

Oddduck · Mar 17, 2012

Alistair Roo said:
At the end, it comes to games, and Nintendo has the best system sellers so if what they said about a huge tide of Wii U and 3DS games for the holiday season is true, then I think they can get away with a high price

GameCube had Mario, two Zelda games, two Metroids, two Star Fox's, Kirby, FZero, 2 Pikmins, Smash Bros, Mario Kart, Mario Party, Resident Evil remake, Resident Evil Zero, Resident Evil 4, Wave Race, 1080 Snowboarding, Luigi's Mansion, Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes, Star Wars Rogue Squadron, Animal Crossing, Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles, Sonic the hedgehog, Phantasy Star online, etc

The system became third place in sales. People need to stop acting like Nintendo's franchises will always save Nintendo consoles.

AceBandage · Mar 17, 2012

Oddduck said:
GameCube had Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Star Fox, Kirby, FZero, Pikmin, Smash Bros, Resident Evil remake, Resident Evil Zero, Resident Evil 4, Wave Race, 1080 Snowboarding, Luigi's Mansion, Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes.

The system became third place in sales. People need to stop acting like Nintendo's franchises will always save Nintendo consoles.

On the other side of things, Nintendo's main franchises (particularly Mario) have seen an enormous resurgence in popularity in the last 6 years.
Add to that the addition of other IPs that they created this last generation that have sold multiples of millions.

Rösti · Mar 17, 2012

And we yet again have a news drought a.k.a the E3 bear unsuccessfully grasps for the Reggie salmons. Though what IdeaMan has in store should be interesting, through probably not as ravishing as one could anticipate.

Now there's a potential Nintendo Direct broadcast in April, the Fiscal Year Earnings Release (FY11) on the 26th of April and PAX East to look forward too, as well as any news coming from SEC filings (I'll dig through those). And of course interviews and articles to scour. Hopefully there's more to this MoSys/1T-SRAM thing; as far as I can see 1T-SRAM still is MoSys' technology as they've got it trademarked and everything, and they retained when trading patents with Invesas the right to offer current licensees a continued deal. Nintendo is a current licensee, so I wonder what pushed them to abandon this technology. IBM is responsible for the eDRAM in Wii U, but does IBM manufacture any other type of memory module?

A.KU.MU · Mar 17, 2012

Strife91 said:
If it's only 2x more powerful than 360, I don't want to pay more than 250.

$349. Believe.

AceBandage · Mar 17, 2012

ElTopo said:
There were a few factors against it, such as launching a year after Playstation 2, horrible design/color choice, bad marketing, (imho) it lacked an immediate killer application and had a shitty launch line-up. It also lacked anything (other than Nintendo games) to distinguish itself from the competition.

But indeed, only Nintendo games are not enough for a success.

Edit:
Let's be clear because I've read this in other threads: Launching a year after an important competitor is in general a pretty bad idea. I'm not sure why people think that MS and Sony can launch a year later without any problems.

It's all about perception at that point.
Will people perceive the 720/PS4 as genuine steps up from the Wii U? Will they see the value in shelling out X amount for them in comparison to a system that is cheaper and already has an established library?

It'll certainly be interesting.

Support NeoGAF

Wii U Speculation Thread The Third: Casting Dreams in The Castle of Miyamoto

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Neo Member

Member

Banned

Member

aka Mannny

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Banned

aka Mannny

Member

Banned

Banned

aka Mannny

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

My source is my ass!

Banned

Member

Banned

Rösti

Unconfirmed Member

Banned

Banned

Similar threads