Joe Molotov
Member
If the Wii U is your only HD console.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Iwata on third parties, hundreds of inquiries since GDC about Nintendo Web Framework
- Thread starter Hobby
- Start date
If the Wii U is your only HD console.
tkscz
Member
Conker's live and reloaded vs Kameo. That is marginal, not huge, marginal. There wasn't a big difference until Banjo and Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts, which looked WAY better than both Conker's and Kameo.
That's some impressive looking gameplay if you ask me.
Beermeister
Banned
Talk about being in denial. It is underpowered.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Yep.
BlockheadBrown
Member
Compared to what, exactly? PS4 & Durango? Sure. PS3 and 360? No.
Wickerbasket
Member
But Nintendo shouldn't be trying to compete with the PS3 and 360; it won't win that fight, they already have huge libraries of games.
Iwata cant be serious. I'm glad he's going after web and indie developers, but this can't be his answer to Wii U's low power driving away third parties.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Which 3rd parties were driven away by WiiU low power?
With the same people trolling nintendo. ... including nintendo.
Considering the previous justification for poor third party support was that you buy a Nintendo system for Nintendo games (which I mostly agree with), I find it slightly...unsettling that Iwata's retort for there being few Nintendo games for the near-future is that some indie developers are expressing interest in making titles.
I don't know. Ask the shareholder who asked Iwata the question.
Quote from OP:
I'm not saying power is the main reason Wii U is missing out on third party support. But it's a part of it.
BlockheadBrown
Member
They tried to keep up what worked with the Wii. They made business decisions to keep backwards compatibility (at least one generation), to have a system that has a new but familiar interface and to produce a capable system in a relatively small package that's both power and space efficient. Did they seem to consider what MS and Sony had coming next? In some capacity, I'm sure. If they decided to go BIG game against those systems, we would have seen something more similar to what Sony and MS are going to be releasing within a year. Sony has maintained that they want their systems to be roughly 10 times as powerful as the last system. Knowing this, if Nintendo wanted to compete against that, they could have. For whatever reasons, they didn't. I can't explain why. I don't have any insider information. They chose a direction that hasn't panned out so far. The coming months and years will better determine how successful their initiatives are. It's too early to put a fork in it. People love to bandwagon though. If you're the press any news that gets you hits is worth publishing. Hipsters were bashing Nintendo before it was cool.
Nintendo surprised even the most ardent critics with the 3DS. It took some time, but the system is definitely hitting its stride. Can the same happen with the Wii U? Maybe. Time will tell. Until then, either play the system or wait for the others.
We own a Wii U. I love it for what it is. One of these days, we'll get one of the newer systems from either Sony or Microsoft (maybe both?). A system's purchasing substantiation should be on the exclusives it provides that you're interested in. The rest is gravy. For Sony, I'm really interested in what their studios can do with the hardware. For Microsoft, I'm more looking forward to what all this talk about entertainment is. I do want to see their vision. Until that happens, there's plenty to play on the current gen systems and plenty to look forward to on the Wii U. We are so lucky as gamers to have the variety that's in the market these days. So much to play. So little time.
PaulExcellent
Member
Why cultivate an audience if in 2 years all their games will be on Durango and PS4 and not WiiU compatible?
WiiU will be getting ports of PS360 titles for years and some unique games, think ports of RE5 and 6 and some special Wii U RE game not RE7.
If you build an audience in the system than essentially it would still give reason to develop games on the Wii U because its apparent easy of development and just upscale to other platforms. Majority of the arguments on Nintendo platforms is due to the only Audience on there only wanting Nintendo games, that's only true if they don't give a real effort to the machine and only let Nintendo shine on it anyway.
I'm a huge Nintendo fan (as you can probably guess from my avatar), and I like this initiative from Nintendo, but they are seriously in denial if they think this can make up for a situation where none of the bigger third parties create games for them. These partnerships will at best guarantee that the console have interesting content for the core - which ofcourse is nice. But what it will not do is give Nintendo exposure - and with the way the Wii U is selling right now - they need every bit of exposure they can get. They need the big titles at retails to have a Wii U SKU to augment visibility. They need to be talked about at video game sites. And mostly they need those games that not only look "neat" - but who can draw in new players, and even though some of the best games of this gen have been indie-games (Braid, FTL, VVVVVV), it will not be enough for a mainstream consumer. Unfortunately. Now give us Shenmue 3!
lwilliams3
Member
Yeah, it will not be comparable to last-gen where we started with wall-guy, or whatever that was called. Developers have came a long way from that. The Wii U is new, though, and it take some time for developers to understand the unique specs of the system. In the case of Nintendo, they are still learning things that others had years of experience on. NBMBU and Nintendoland is just the beginning for them. We may see a significant boost for first-party efforts.
That kind of draw distance in an open world game? Sure is. That kind of fidelity at that range is a decent amount beyond what either the ps3 or 360 is capable of.
Refreshment.01
Member
Considering BF4 is on PS3/360 I wouldn't put that to any counts.
You mean from the same publisher that's been cutting and internally blocking Wii U support over bad blood? Yeah, like I'll believe that for a second.
Refreshment.01
Member
I knew this answer was coming. The hardware is one of the factors, there are others of course. But you can't expect DICE to ignore a close 140 million console sales when they already have the tech and toolset stablished for those platforms. Realitiy is, DICE didn't even bother to do any significant R&D on the Wii U, even before release, due to hardware specs. Just check out the laugh answer about the Wii U situation in that Battlefield 4 Q&A.
Same reason Epic is not porting UE4 to the console, so it will miss out games that only run on that engine. Or Crytek for that matter. You know the guys that before any publically known specs where pushing for the 8 GB for next gen will be nice.
Zoramon089
Banned
First it's specs, now it's fanbase (oh, and specs). The reality is that specs aren't the issue and that much should be clear. It's for other factors
That's not really the right phrasing. Or conclusion for that matter. They aren't "officially supporting" it, so if anyone with a UE4 engine'd game wants to bring said game to wiiu, they'll have to go it alone (ie no help from Epic, no tools specifically for wiiu sdk etc). Doesn't mean it won't get UE4 games, just that it'll be much less convenient for developers to port UE4 games to wiiu (making it less likely)
Vermillion
Banned
Mmph, I agree with what Opiate said some time back - Nintendo shouldn't continue this trend of being blindsided when third-parties aren't supporting them. They should have already come up with some way to survive sans third-parties, while still trying to get them onboard on the side. I think their current indie courting is a part of that.
Refreshment.01
Member
That's why it is specified Unreal Engine 4 only games.
The list above i compiled is very valid. Those are developers which the most important part of their busyness models rely in selling, at the begining on each gen, the toolsets that target highend platforms. It's their modus operandi, plain and simple, to the point that even console manufacturers make hardware decisions based in some of these guys suggestions. Wii U doesn't have the specs, so the attitude was to wait and see. Now, the console doesn't have the specs nor the sales so it's getting completly ignored. So yes, HardWare was a deciding factor.
But first you said specs were the problem and now your saying it's the userbase...
Nintendo and EA got into a 'fight' That's why BF4 isn't coming to Wii U, if Nintendo fixes the relationship between them and EA than we would probably see BF4 on Wii U, and Dice and Crytek are owned by EA, so they can't give much support to Wii U if EA doesn't let them.
There's a big question here, people are saying the Wii U is underpowered compared to PS4/720, which it is, BUT does that mean the Wii U can't handle PS4/720 games? No, the Wii U can't handle them at the same output but that doesn't mean it will stop third party games from coming to Wii U, the Wii was WAY too underpowered to come to the Wii, the Wii U is a lot closer to PS4/720 than Wii was to PS3/360.
Edit: And like what jeffers posted, Crytek said/says Cry Engine 3 runs "beautifully on Wii U"
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/394067/we-had-crysis-3-running-on-wii-u-says-crytek-ceo/
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2012/06/20/crytek-cryengine-3-beautiful-on-wii-u
should probably revisit your "valid" list of 3 devs...
lwilliams3
Member
. Since these games are showing up on the other systems though, selling power is likely way more important than better specs in this case. We will see what happens when the Wii U gets a good sized userbase and a better ecosystem for bigger third-party developers.
Refreshment.01
Member
I'm not backing from any of my statements. Blu questioned if there was any developers that weren't supporting the console because of hardware. I presented some cases that point to that reality. The thing is life is not binary (black/white) like you want to paint it. Hardware among other factors contribute to some of these games not coming to the Wii U. So there's not just 1 everything or nothing reason, there are multiple ones.
This doesn't contradict any of my statements. The Wii U is more capable than the 360/PS3, yet this 2 consoles have the Cryengine running. The engine can be scaled back to even mobile platforms.
Let me put it this way, had the Wii U featured highend specs chances for porting some of these engines would have increased dramtically due to the need of having a set of tools for taking better advanatge of the platform capabilities. For someone like Crytek, a more feature rich Wii U would have been a strong incentive to port Crysis 3 just not because of sales but also for the reason that the game becamos a marketing tool for their engine.
Also it would be nice if you guys provide me an informative link about the fight between EA and NIntendo. This seems intereseting.
Even with the asumption that the Upad costs a 150? When the BOM is no where near that much. WHen comapared to other products in the market
That "7 year old hardware" argument is a bit slanted. For example, the Xbox 360 sold for a major loss out of the gate, about $125 for each $400 console. PS3 sold for $599. That already makes the "point" a little less genuine, compared to the $299 to $349 Wii U which is more or less sold at cost.
It also can't be ignored that Nintendo is choosing a different angle, with an extremely expensive controller. Replacements are $150. So the actual "box" is probably about $200 to $250. Isn't that what the 360 and PS3 base models go for these days, give or take? Chalk up the rest of the sticker price to the trimmings that come with the package. Hard drives, games, controllers, Kinects, gamepads, etc.
Is there similar outrage over the OUYA's power? Or is the fact that it's $99 and built for a different purpose somehow relevant there and not here? It's like a sports car owner scoffing at someone's 2013 Ford Focus. They're both car owners but with completely different priorities and budgets. Though like many who had a 360/Wii or PS3/Wii this gen, I'm sure several of us will end up owning more than one console this go 'round too.
Nintendo should target those indies and HARD, in anticipation for when Wii U's price hits that "sweet spot" that resonates with the casual crowd. I don't picture unique and affordable indie software making people rush out to buy a PS4. That crowd will value the top of the line, huge budget experiences. Wii U's biggest competition IMO will be the 360/PS3, which I don't think will die as quickly as some expect.
I could be wrong, but indies I think are Nintendo's best shot. It's a shame that they skimped out on the U's internal memory. I suppose they can upgrade that over time as affordability allows.
It also can't be ignored that Nintendo is choosing a different angle, with an extremely expensive controller. Replacements are $150. So the actual "box" is probably about $200 to $250. Isn't that what the 360 and PS3 base models go for these days, give or take? Chalk up the rest of the sticker price to the trimmings that come with the package. Hard drives, games, controllers, Kinects, gamepads, etc.
Is there similar outrage over the OUYA's power? Or is the fact that it's $99 and built for a different purpose somehow relevant there and not here? It's like a sports car owner scoffing at someone's 2013 Ford Focus. They're both car owners but with completely different priorities and budgets. Though like many who had a 360/Wii or PS3/Wii this gen, I'm sure several of us will end up owning more than one console this go 'round too.
Nintendo should target those indies and HARD, in anticipation for when Wii U's price hits that "sweet spot" that resonates with the casual crowd. I don't picture unique and affordable indie software making people rush out to buy a PS4. That crowd will value the top of the line, huge budget experiences. Wii U's biggest competition IMO will be the 360/PS3, which I don't think will die as quickly as some expect.
I could be wrong, but indies I think are Nintendo's best shot. It's a shame that they skimped out on the U's internal memory. I suppose they can upgrade that over time as affordability allows.
PaulExcellent
Member
Yeah, that is not the most reliable source of information when it comes to the WiiU and lack of games.
Best Wii U post I've read in ages.
Refreshment.01
Member
Look at how some developers look at the Wii U from a hardware perspective. It's from Rein but i think is related to what we are disscussing:
Also to reiterate, i would like to see an article regarding the EA and Nintendo fight please. Since i wasn't aware of that issue. And nothing is coming up it seems.
Also to reiterate, i would like to see an article regarding the EA and Nintendo fight please. Since i wasn't aware of that issue. And nothing is coming up it seems.
If you seriously haven't heard of this, you don't really follow WiiU threads and as such your notions of the system are probably preconceived. For reference, Crysis 3 didnt get a port due to lack of incentive, but because EA actively blocked its development.
cartman414
Member
AGITΩ;55835248 said:
Sure, that's how it went this past generation.
EA was originally a major player for Wii U, even having a significant presence at Nintendo's 2012 E3 conference. The rumor is that Nintendo's eShop was originally going to be an Origin platform but the deal fell through and EA's been making Nintendo pay ever since.
There is an easy way to remedy this, just release the complete specs, than I would understand. But officially we know next to nothing and withholding the information only furthers the suspicion that the Wii U is underpowered.
We already know more about the PS4 than about the Wii U.
Isn't that the rumored replacement fee? Even so, my post assumed a range of $100-$150 (the basic U's price with $100 subtracted is $200). So I think that's covered. But I wouldn't mind if you linked me an accurate cost analysis of the gamepad, anyway.
The industry that has seen hundreds of studios and one major publisher collapse within the last 18 months. Perhaps its not just Nintendo that needs to reevaluate how they do business. When a game selling 3milllion is considered a failure, there's a much bigger problem that needs to be discussed.
shinra-bansho
Member
This idea that becoming some sort of indie mecca, in absence of major third party publisher support, is going to spur recovery is frankly the most bizarre wishful thinking.
This is without considering these indies are likely going to want to publish on other platforms as well to actually profit from their ventures.
The point was that the target demographic for video games has for a very long time been 15-35 (predominantly straight, white and middle-class) males. Although ymmv on race and socioeconomic status.
The games that were being played may have been different, the target players weren't really.
This is without considering these indies are likely going to want to publish on other platforms as well to actually profit from their ventures.
Final Fantasy's primary target demographic is still males aged 15-35. That's not saying it doesn't have broader appeal, as does Kingdom Hearts. But they were just examples pulled off the top of my head. Gran Turismo, Tomb Raider, Metal Gear Solid, Tekken, Tony Hawk.
The point was that the target demographic for video games has for a very long time been 15-35 (predominantly straight, white and middle-class) males. Although ymmv on race and socioeconomic status.
The games that were being played may have been different, the target players weren't really.
It seemed to work for PC gaming. Its also only one part of a whole strategy that Nintendo's trying to do. They're literally casting the widest net of options to them to try and have something stick. It may or may not work out, but lets not blame them for trying something.
Refreshment.01
Member
Interesting. You happend to know what's the rumor source. I find this really hard to believe btw, that Nintendo would have contemplated something like that type of partnership with EA in the first place. When EA is such an strong prescense across al platforms. Really hard to believe.
Is not that hard to do Glass, is just common sense. There are products, ones that are not even subsidized, that feature a lot of more hardware than what the Upad contains and the cost does not reach 150 dollars. Just a quick Amazon search by price would be enough.
"Please understand" is dangerously aproaching an Andrew Ryan subconsious type trigger phrase. Is like a summon call from Iwata for the partisans to defend the cause XD
Comparing the Wii U to the PC platform is one of the biggest stretches you could make.
i don't think replacement costs would accurately reflect anything. if you wanted a replacement wii mote, they're not going to give it to you for bom. the gamepad is a nice kit but i cannot believe that it'd cost anymore than $40 over a traditional controller.
Yeah. See? We've been having that conversation for going on six years now. The same one. Really. Go back and look. In fact, I'm pretty sure your post is a copy-paste job of something I may have written four years back and you're just fucking with me.
Its been mentioned in many GAF threads several times. I'm personally unsure of the source. However a lot of the evidence points to this being possible. Around the time of the deal falling through, the denied Crytek the option to put their new engine on the Wii U, as well as pulling their development of several games for the platform. IIRC Battlefield 4 was in development for Wii U by E3 2012. I could be wrong there but I thought I remembered seeing some interview pointing to that happening.
H_Prestige
Banned
The system is overprice because nobody is buying it. Either Nintendo needs to somehow make the system worth $300 for consumers, or they should drop it down to $200, which is the price consumers normally expect of Nintendo hardware.
This is why Nintendo making a PS4 spec comparable system just wouldn't happen. Consumer expectations. As much as we try to deny it, we know it as a legitimate fact.