• 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.

The Wii U Speculation Thread V: The Final Frontier

Status
Not open for further replies.

Aostia

El Capitan Todd
It's most likely going to come with a Wii-remote and nunchuk as well, expect some games to use those as the main controller.. As for the number of touchscreen controllers, that's unknown. The original announcement only had one of those supported per system, and there were no plans whatsoever to sell them separately. When pressed, Miyamoto said they were going to look into if it were possible to support two of them on the chance that a third-party developer might want to have a game that required taking your controller to a friend's house.

I hope they can make the effort to support two Upad, but I don't see in a "Upad + Remotes" scheme a limit.
I think that it's main focuses will be on single player experiences and online multiplayer experiences, in terms of direct control.
About the local multiplayer, I think that they will stress the a-simmetric scheme, that in my opinion could be a very new way of handling that part of the game.
Yes, probably we will not be allowed to play locally with 4 Upads, but considering how that could cost and how interesting could be the asimmetric method, I think that this solution could offer a lot.

Upad = single player
Upad = online multiplayer
Upad + remotes = local

In this way, it can be easier to setup (cheaper in terms of costs; a lot of remotes all around the world and the backward compatibility should help this part; new game modes and so on) a very interesting local multiplayer up to 5 players (and not only 4)
 
I think so.
I am inclined to agree, in which case I don't think that we can necessarily appeal to any innate logic in Rockstar's business decisions when we consider the likelihood of a Wii U version of GTA. Just because it makes sense and would sell doesn't mean it will definitely happen...
 

EatChildren

Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
EC, out of curiosity, do you expect Wii U to even get a port of GTAV?

Maybe, down the line, but at launch no. I fully expect Rockstar to turn their nose up at the Wii U and focus on the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC instead.

It's easy to write it off as anti-Nintendo conspiracy nonsense, but this is just how Rockstar behaves with releases. They follow a predictable pattern of releasing games on platforms that guaranty the highest profit margins. They take into account dev time (reworking engines, optimisation, QA, manufacturing, distribution, etc), and shape releases accordingly.

Or, long and short of it, if it won't make them a bazillion dollars they just don't give a fuck. See Red Dead Redemption on PC. Doesn't matter that it's based off the GTA IV engine. It doesn't matter how well GTA IV PC did, or how many people ask about a Red Dead port. They just don't care because they see the 360 and PS3 as the big money makers. Which they are.

For Nintendo's platforms in the past, there hasn't been enough demand or, in their eyes, a market to support big releases. Who cares if Nintendo fans want San Andreas? It will make tenfold the money it would make on the GCN released on the PS2, and even Xbox. This is where that market is, moreso than the GCN, so why bother?

They'll have a similar attitude to the Wii U. It's a new system, so right off the bat the potential market will be much, much smaller than the 360 and PS3. It's a Nintendo system, so they'll be wary of the audience. They'll take the conservative approach and not bother with a port as there's too many maybes, and the 360, PS3 and PC versions will do more than enough to cover the dev costs.

Maybe down the track when (if) the Wii U has a proven sizeable installbase of customers who buy these kinds of games, Rockstar will release a port of the game. Until then, and unless Nintendo throws some money their way, I don't really see it happening.

One thing to remember with the Wii U and GTA is that Nintendo isn't competing with a whole new generation of systems. This isn't like a couple of systems launching, each battling out with exclusives and deals to outsell the other. GTA V will release on the 360 and PS3, and they already have a massive audience. Fact of the matter is even if the Wii U had GTA V at launch, a vast majority of gamers will still just buy it for the 360 and PS3. That's the system they already own. That's the system they know. That's where their LIVE/PSN accounts are tied to their achievements/trophies. That's where their friends are found.

And that's why the Wii U needs exclusive, new games to draw in new gamers. Proving to the Xbox/PlayStation crowd that the Wii U has all the same games means nothing when those people already own those systems.
 
Absolutely true. The issue is that MS is capable of doing that. That's what is fucked up.

That goes the whole idea of fair competition. I thought things like bribing another company to keep a product off the competitors market would be illegal but I guess I was wrong. I mean how much did GTA IV sell on 360? around 8 million? Did someone say that MS spent 80 million just in moneyhats (is that even true?) means they spent $10 per copy bribing rockstar to sell a $60 game on their system. if 33% of that price goes to the retailer and 47% goes to the publisher and the royalty on xbox was about 20% then MS would receive $12 on each copy and they would rake in a cool $16 million dollars after you take away the cost of the moneyhat.

Even if SONY ended up outselling the xbox 360 version 2:1 if there was no moneyhat, lets say for example 5 million vs 10 million on the ps3 MS would still make a $120 million if the royalty fee was 20% wouldn't it have been smarter for MS to just make their own competing game for $64 million and maybe sell less than 2 million copies ww to beat what they would have spent on the moneyhat? If you look at the end of the generation is that really worth it since MS only got out of finishing third because of Kinect?

These numbers are just estimates of course, but I am just trying to wrap my head around the validity of this rumour of 50 million 80 million thing. Maybe I am missing the point of how this was really beneficial for MS.
 

BD1

Banned
Assuming GTA V does come to Wii U, we should be asking if Nintendo will moneyhat DRC features, not exclusivity. My money would be on a straight port, but there are some very obvious enhancements the Wii U controller could make for the game.
 
Maybe, down the line, but at launch no. I fully expect Rockstar to turn their nose up at the Wii U and focus on the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC instead.

It's easy to write it off as anti-Nintendo conspiracy nonsense, but this is just how Rockstar behaves with releases. They follow a predictable pattern of releasing games on platforms that guaranty the highest profit margins. They take into account dev time (reworking engines, optimisation, QA, manufacturing, distribution, etc), and shape releases accordingly.

Or, long and short of it, if it won't make them a bazillion dollars they just don't give a fuck. See Red Dead Redemption on PC. Doesn't matter that it's based off the GTA IV engine. It doesn't matter how well GTA IV PC did, or how many people ask about a Red Dead port. They just don't care because they see the 360 and PS3 as the big money makers. Which they are.

For Nintendo's platforms in the past, there hasn't been enough demand or, in their eyes, a market to support big releases. Who cares if Nintendo fans want San Andreas? It will make tenfold the money it would make on the GCN released on the PS2, and even Xbox. This is where that market is, moreso than the GCN, so why bother?

They'll have a similar attitude to the Wii U. It's a new system, so right off the bat the potential market will be much, much smaller than the 360 and PS3. It's a Nintendo system, so they'll be wary of the audience. They'll take the conservative approach and not bother with a port as there's too many maybes, and the 360, PS3 and PC versions will do more than enough to cover the dev costs.

Maybe down the track when (if) the Wii U has a proven sizeable installbase of customers who buy these kinds of games, Rockstar will release a port of the game. Until then, and unless Nintendo throws some money their way, I don't really see it happening.

One thing to remember with the Wii U and GTA is that Nintendo isn't competing with a whole new generation of systems. This isn't like a couple of systems launching, each battling out with exclusives and deals to outsell the other. GTA V will release on the 360 and PS3, and they already have a massive audience. Fact of the matter is even if the Wii U had GTA V at launch, a vast majority of gamers will still just buy it for the 360 and PS3. That's the system they already own. That's the system they know. That's where their LIVE/PSN accounts are tied to their achievements/trophies. That's where their friends are found.

And that's why the Wii U needs exclusive, new games to draw in new gamers. Proving to the Xbox/PlayStation crowd that the Wii U has all the same games means nothing when those people already own those systems.

Where does LA Noire PC fit into your explanation?
 
The gpu has been stated to be capable of outputting to four screens in addition to the TV, so it should be possible on a technical level to have four DRCs at once. Officially (as of about eleven months ago, which is last we heard), it's so far limited to one.
The GPU isn't the limiting factor here, it's the ability to reliably send that much video over the air in realtime. That's a LOT of bandwidth. As an example, the iPad sends 1024x768 video over the air to Apple TV, there's a couple seconds of lag.
 

BurntPork

Banned
Maybe, down the line, but at launch no. I fully expect Rockstar to turn their nose up at the Wii U and focus on the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC instead.

It's easy to write it off as anti-Nintendo conspiracy nonsense, but this is just how Rockstar behaves with releases. They follow a predictable pattern of releasing games on platforms that guaranty the highest profit margins. They take into account dev time (reworking engines, optimisation, QA, manufacturing, distribution, etc), and shape releases accordingly.

Or, long and short of it, if it won't make them a bazillion dollars they just don't give a fuck. See Red Dead Redemption on PC. Doesn't matter that it's based off the GTA IV engine. It doesn't matter how well GTA IV PC did, or how many people ask about a Red Dead port. They just don't care because they see the 360 and PS3 as the big money makers. Which they are.

For Nintendo's platforms in the past, there hasn't been enough demand or, in their eyes, a market to support big releases. Who cares if Nintendo fans want San Andreas? It will make tenfold the money it would make on the GCN released on the PS2, and even Xbox. This is where that market is, moreso than the GCN, so why bother?

They'll have a similar attitude to the Wii U. It's a new system, so right off the bat the potential market will be much, much smaller than the 360 and PS3. It's a Nintendo system, so they'll be wary of the audience. They'll take the conservative approach and not bother with a port as there's too many maybes, and the 360, PS3 and PC versions will do more than enough to cover the dev costs.

Maybe down the track when (if) the Wii U has a proven sizeable installbase of customers who buy these kinds of games, Rockstar will release a port of the game. Until then, and unless Nintendo throws some money their way, I don't really see it happening.

One thing to remember with the Wii U and GTA is that Nintendo isn't competing with a whole new generation of systems. This isn't like a couple of systems launching, each battling out with exclusives and deals to outsell the other. GTA V will release on the 360 and PS3, and they already have a massive audience. Fact of the matter is even if the Wii U had GTA V at launch, a vast majority of gamers will still just buy it for the 360 and PS3. That's the system they already own. That's the system they know. That's where their LIVE/PSN accounts are tied to their achievements/trophies. That's where their friends are found.

And that's why the Wii U needs exclusive, new games to draw in new gamers. Proving to the Xbox/PlayStation crowd that the Wii U has all the same games means nothing when those people already own those systems.
Why did you have to make so much sense?

I almost want to be banned for E3 now...
 

EatChildren

Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Where does LA Noire PC fit into your explanation?

LA Noire was a money sink and stuck in development hell for far too long. It sold well on consoles, so they tried their hand at PC. And, to no surprise, the PC port was fucking janky ass shit.

LA Noire also was, from memory, originally announced for PC along with the other platforms too. The others just ended up taking priority.

And, for future conversation, Max Payne 3 is coming to PC because that's where the OG Max Payne audience is at.

PC is a big market and Rockstar knows it. But in 99% of cases it will play second fiddle to the 360 and PS3. Wii U will be even further below that.

Why did you have to make so much sense?

I almost want to be banned for E3 now...

There's no guarantees or absolutes. Nintendo might moneyhat Rockstar. Rockstar might see the value of new system hype. It's an unknown at this point, and there's always a possibility GTA V will launch on the Wii U alongside the 360 and PS3. But I don't think it will, based on Rockstar's history and release patterns.

If you're a big Nintendo fan who was hoping to play GTA V on the Wii U, because you can't play it elsewhere, then that sucks balls. But, for E3, my eyes are not on what third party ports Nintendo can ensure, but what unique games and features the Wii U will have to appeal to a new audience. They have an uphill battle against a massive established 360/PS3 fanbase. Ports, no matter what or how good, wont cut it. There needs to be more.
 
The GPU isn't the limiting factor here, it's the ability to reliably send that much video over the air in realtime. That's a LOT of bandwidth.

The GPU is the limiting factor in the sense that while it could output four video feeds (BW wouldn't really be the issue), it wouldn't be able to render "lots" of data to four screens at the same time.
 

BD1

Banned
Maybe, down the line, but at launch no. I fully expect Rockstar to turn their nose up at the Wii U and focus on the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC instead.

.

Makes a lot of sense, sadly. I wonder if Nintendo of America would pitch publishing the game on Wii U? It's a bad precedent to set, but it might convince R* to have the game ready for launch.
 

HylianTom

Banned
So instead of RDR they give us games like Bully for PC
Of course. We get, as I've said, the "Consolation Prize Games" from Rockstar.. and other western development houses.

With MS able to pretty much buy their position in this industry (an industry that their heart may not be in - one that they may see mainly as a means to an non-gaming end goal), I'm uncomfortable with the idea of one or a small number of third parties as kingmakers.

Nintendo being able to forge their way forward with their own new IPs is a recipe for future stability, not at risk of outside troublemakers holding these types of games over them.
 
The GPU isn't the limiting factor here, it's the ability to reliably send that much video over the air in realtime. That's a LOT of bandwidth. As an example, the iPad sends 1024x768 video over the air to Apple TV, there's a couple seconds of lag.

This is a good point.

We know that latency is at or below one-sixtieth of a second for one DRC. I would presume this to mean that two would be technically possible at 30fps, and four would be technically possible at 15fps. Obviously, many people would twitch uncontrollably at the thought of 15fps gaming, but I submit this as a possibility.

They could also resort to things I don't like, such as streaming at a lower resolution and have some sort of upscaling capability on the DRC.


The GPU is the limiting factor in the sense that while it could output four video feeds (BW wouldn't really be the issue), it wouldn't be able to render "lots" of data to four screens at the same time.

If you render four screens at 15fps or two screens at 30fps, the rendering resources shouldn't be much more horrible than rendering one screen at 60fps, no? So splitting the frames based on time -- let's call that "TimeSplitting"
goddamnit Crytek, you know what I want, TAKE MY MONEY!!
-- would solvemitigate both the bandwidth and rendering issues, even though the solution is obviously not ideal.


Edit: "solve" is a too promisey word… obviously, there's a bit more overhead involved when working with four separate small images versus one huge one
 

ecosse_011172

Junior Member
The GPU isn't the limiting factor here, it's the ability to reliably send that much video over the air in realtime. That's a LOT of bandwidth. As an example, the iPad sends 1024x768 video over the air to Apple TV, there's a couple seconds of lag.

Isn't that buffering.
If it were the case that there was so much lag then gaming using iPads as controllers for gaming on the TV wouldnt' be an option.
 
There's no guarantees or absolutes. Nintendo might moneyhat Rockstar. Rockstar might see the value of new system hype. It's an unknown at this point, and there's always a possibility GTA V will launch on the Wii U alongside the 360 and PS3. But I don't think it will, based on Rockstar's history and release patterns.

If you're a big Nintendo fan who was hoping to play GTA V on the Wii U, because you can't play it elsewhere, then that sucks balls. But, for E3, my eyes are not on what third party ports Nintendo can ensure, but what unique games and features the Wii U will have to appeal to a new audience. They have an uphill battle against a massive established 360/PS3 fanbase. Ports, no matter what or how good, wont cut it. There needs to be more.

I agree with you that ports won't cut it in themselves, but I don't agree that they're not relevant. I'm doubtful that Nintendo can make significant, lasting inroads in the core market unless they can convince at least a respectably-sized minority of current PS3/360 owners to see Wii U as a viable upgrade path, and that's definitely not going to happen if Wii U is missing out on a large percentage of major multiplatform titles even before Microsoft's and Sony's next consoles hit.

Nintendo shouldn't have to moneyhat to merely get multiplatform support, but if that's what they need to do to overcome their own history and position in the market, it's what they should be doing.
 

HylianTom

Banned
Rockstar table tennis HD remix for launch then
Yup! I'd believe that type of game over any other from them.

If Nintendo wants these types of games on their home consoles, their best, most stable, safest bet is to make these games themselves - or to get second parties to shoulder the work with their guidance.

If third parties want to come along for the ride, that's a lovely bonus in my eyes. But en masse? Not a realistic expectation, I don't think.

Nintendo controlling their own destiny.. yep.
 

EatChildren

Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Of course. We get, as I've said, the "Consolation Prize Games" from Rockstar.. and other western development houses.

Nintendo needs to give them reason to care if they want them to do so. The Wii, sales aside, was a shitty platform that poorly supported the business model of big budget graphically demanding HD releases. They didn't get the Western support because the system was too shitty to handle the games they were making. One can argue that they should have put more resources aside to make exclusive, hardware appropriate Wii games, or that the big budget HD game business model is dumb, but that's just the reality of the situation.

Publishers make lots of dumb, unfair decisions regarding Nintendo platforms. But Nintendo makes a lot of dumb, or restrictive decisions themselves.

I agree with you that ports won't cut it in themselves, but I don't agree that they're not relevant. I'm doubtful that Nintendo can make significant, lasting inroads in the core market unless they can convince at least a respectably-sized minority of current PS3/360 owners to see Wii U as a viable upgrade path, and that's definitely not going to happen if Wii U is missing out on a large percentage of major multiplatform titles even before Microsoft's and Sony's next consoles hit.

I didn't mean to imply I thought ports were irrelevant. They are very relevant. But they're the icing on the cake. They're the fluff.

Joe Shmo owns an Xbox 360. It's his third one because others died. He's an OG Xbox 360 gamer. Loves Halo, Gears, all that kind of stuff. He has no particular allegiance to any company though. He's not anti-Nintendo. Hell, maybe he even owns a Wii, because Smash Bros. is one of his favourite mutliplayer games. But he does most of his gaming on the Xbox 360, as he has for this entire generation.

Wii U launches. It has GTA V. It has Assassin's Creed. It has a bunch of games he really loves. "Cool!" he thinks. He's also caught up in the new console hype. He loves new toys, new tech, and is interested in the Wii U. It's new hardware after all. And it has games he wants to play. That's great! Wait...the Wii U doesn't have his friends list. All his buddies own Xbox 360's. He cant compare achievements. More importantly, he cant play online with his bros, because they don't own Wii Us. Damn. Plus, he's more familiar with the 360 and the Wii U. Oh, and the Wii U...well, it's a new console. That's a big investment. More money spent. Hmm. Joe Shmo decides that, as much as he wants the Wii U, it's more economic to by those games for his current system, where all his friends game.

Though maybe if the Wii U had some big games Joe couldn't get elsewhere, he'd buy the system. If he saw some games and thought "Holy shit! That looks incredible! I must play it!", and discovered he could only do so on the Wii U, then that's where his money would go. And hey, it has those game he mentioned earlier too, so he might just buy them!

Ports will matter most next generation, I agree. The Wii U needs to get a chunk of Microsoft and Sony's audience then. And they matter now. But, as the 360 and PS3 are not remotely new systems, with new audience, the Wii U needs exclusive works more than anything to appeal to these people. Otherwise they're probably not going to care very much, as the Wii U will be seen as a cool system with all the games they can buy for cheaper on their existing platforms, and the only exclusives being the usual Nintendo stuff. Which makes it no different to every Nintendo platform.
 

Hieberrr

Member
It is a secret to everyone, but don't get your hopes up for more than one tablet controller being supported.
The local multiplayer focus is going to be on asymmetric multiplayer, with the tablet user playing in a different style to the players using Wii remotes.
Nintendo showed off some examples last E3.

The Wii U pad has to be the default controller. Wii remotes will likely be strictly for local multiplayer support.


It's most likely going to come with a Wii-remote and nunchuk as well, expect some games to use those as the main controller.. As for the number of touchscreen controllers, that's unknown. The original announcement only had one of those supported per system, and there were no plans whatsoever to sell them separately. When pressed, Miyamoto said they were going to look into if it were possible to support two of them on the chance that a third-party developer might want to have a game that required taking your controller to a friend's house.


It will support at least four Wii Remotes plus one Wii U Display Remote Controller (DRC) (click on the sixth image). There have been rumblings from Europe's Wine Sector suggesting that devs have been playing with two DRCs simultaneously. The gpu has been stated to be capable of outputting to four screens in addition to the TV, so it should be possible on a technical level to have four DRCs at once. Officially (as of about eleven months ago, which is last we heard), it's so far limited to one.

Edit: The above also means that it could support one DRC plus four Classic Controller Pros, as well.

I really hope they talk about that, because the tablet is completely different than the Wii Remote setup, so I have absolutely no idea how it's going to work. I mean, the DRC is more, arguably, a traditional controller. I feel that not supporting 4 and using it as the "main" controller would be stupid. :S

But, I guess we'll have to wait until E3.
 

test_account

XP-39C²
If you render four screens at 15fps or two screens at 30fps, the rendering resources shouldn't be much more horrible than rendering one screen at 60fps, no? So splitting the frames based on time -- let's call that "TimeSplitting"
goddamnit Crytek, you know what I want, TAKE MY MONEY!!
-- would solvemitigate both the bandwidth and rendering issues, even though the solution is obviously not ideal.


Edit: "solve" is a too promisey word… obviously, there's a bit more overhead involved when working with four separate small images versus one huge one
It is more about the total resolution than fps. Rendering a 1080p picture in 60fps requires much more power than rendering a 720p picture in 60fps.
 

Aostia

El Capitan Todd
If you're a big Nintendo fan who was hoping to play GTA V on the Wii U, because you can't play it elsewhere, then that sucks balls. But, for E3, my eyes are not on what third party ports Nintendo can ensure, but what unique games and features the Wii U will have to appeal to a new audience. They have an uphill battle against a massive established 360/PS3 fanbase. Ports, no matter what or how good, wont cut it. There needs to be more.

The main problem is that we don't live in the planet of third party AAA esclusive anymore.
I think that this is the reason why N should try to get also "simple" AAA multiplatform Wii U versions on their system.
I know that for a PS360 owner a multiplatform title is less relevant, but let's assume that the most possible effort the third parties can make is offer minor (not irrelevant, but minor) games (aka: Killer Freaks for example: it is the only example we can do up to now) as exclusives (that probably will focus more on the Upad than the multi AAA titles for obvious reasons).

Now, if you look on a shelf and see just Killer Freaks from Ubi, you'll probably think that Wii U doesn't have the "real" games. Instead if you look on a shelf and see Assassins Creed 3 aside Killer Freaks, I think that you will be reassured about the lineup.

So, N exclusive titles, AA third party excluseive titles and AAA multiplatform titles could be a very solid offer also for PS360 owners (at least if we don't consider the Nintendo haters, of course; and of course it will be very solid for all the others)

So, I agree that there should be more, but I think that it will be important to get also the Wii U versions of the multiplatform AAA third party titles. That kind of title must become "sure" as it is on PS360. GTA V, RE6 and all the other similar titles should be also on WIi U, if Nintendo want to attract some kind of demographic, in my opinion. Especially between Xmas 12 and Xmas 13 (after that, when DUrango and Orbis will hit the market, it will be also a matter of engines and horsepower...)
 
The GPU isn't the limiting factor here, it's the ability to reliably send that much video over the air in realtime. That's a LOT of bandwidth. As an example, the iPad sends 1024x768 video over the air to Apple TV, there's a couple seconds of lag.

multiple_term_devicesxmfru.jpg


Could compression and/or "time division multiple access or frequency division multiple access" (<- someone cares to explain that) help?

Edit: Wrong quote
 
Publishers make lots of dumb, unfair decisions regarding Nintendo platforms. But Nintendo makes a lot of dumb, or restrictive decisions themselves.

And now we find ourselves here, in the middle of another Wii drought as everybody else gets hyped up for Max Payne 3, Dragon's Dogma and Diablo 3.
 
Isn't that buffering.
If it were the case that there was so much lag then gaming using iPads as controllers for gaming on the TV wouldnt' be an option.
I'm not talking about movies, I'm talking about mirroring the iPad display. And yes, it is unusable for gaming, except for like board games.
 
It is more about the total resolution than fps. Rendering a 1080p picture in 60fps requires much more power than rendering a 720p picture in 60fps.

That's a pretty wildly different scenario than what I'm talking about.

In my case, both situations involve rendering the exact same total number of pixels per second.
 

HylianTom

Banned
Nintendo needs to give them reason to care if they want them to do so. The Wii, sales aside, was a shitty platform that poorly supported the business model of big budget graphically demanding HD releases. They didn't get the Western support because the system was too shitty to handle the games they were making. One can argue that they should have put more resources aside to make exclusive, hardware appropriate Wii games, or that the big budget HD game business model is dumb, but that's just the reality of the situation.

Publishers make lots of dumb, unfair decisions regarding Nintendo platforms. But Nintendo makes a lot of dumb, or restrictive decisions themselves.
Oh, I agree. In this case, I wasn't complaining.. just acknowledging the reality of things.

Part of my support for Nintendo becoming less dependant on third parties comes from a lack of faith in Nintendo's ability (or willingness, really) to stop making the kinds of dumb decisions you speak of.
 

ThatObviousUser

ὁ αἴσχιστος παῖς εἶ
For Nintendo's platforms in the past, there hasn't been enough demand or, in their eyes, a market to support big releases. Who cares if Nintendo fans want San Andreas? It will make tenfold the money it would make on the GCN released on the PS2, and even Xbox. This is where that market is, moreso than the GCN, so why bother?

Are we forgetting Chinatown Wars sold the most on DS? A "kiddy Nintendo handheld," of all things. Each of those three guaranteeing GTA couldn't possibly sell on it.

I'm not arguing with you, I agree, I just think Rockstar would be shortsighted in passing on Wii U and being able to cash in on launch sales.
 

BurntPork

Banned
LA Noire was a money sink and stuck in development hell for far too long. It sold well on consoles, so they tried their hand at PC. And, to no surprise, the PC port was fucking janky ass shit.

LA Noire also was, from memory, originally announced for PC along with the other platforms too. The others just ended up taking priority.

And, for future conversation, Max Payne 3 is coming to PC because that's where the OG Max Payne audience is at.

PC is a big market and Rockstar knows it. But in 99% of cases it will play second fiddle to the 360 and PS3. Wii U will be even further below that.



There's no guarantees or absolutes. Nintendo might moneyhat Rockstar. Rockstar might see the value of new system hype. It's an unknown at this point, and there's always a possibility GTA V will launch on the Wii U alongside the 360 and PS3. But I don't think it will, based on Rockstar's history and release patterns.

If you're a big Nintendo fan who was hoping to play GTA V on the Wii U, because you can't play it elsewhere, then that sucks balls. But, for E3, my eyes are not on what third party ports Nintendo can ensure, but what unique games and features the Wii U will have to appeal to a new audience. They have an uphill battle against a massive established 360/PS3 fanbase. Ports, no matter what or how good, wont cut it. There needs to be more.
I just want Nintendo to prove to the world that Wii U is a serious platform that everyone should consider, rather than an expensive secondary console. Missing out on GTA would prove that Nintendo doesn't care about third-party support at all, and guarantee that we're going to get another Wii. Nintendo has too much to prove now. They need both the ports and IPs to call their own for that audience. Those people aren't going to switch just for an unproven IP. If anything, due to the fact that Nintendo already has a corrupted image, ports of big games might do more for them than new IPs unless Nintendo spends a fuckton on marketing. People that don't buy Nintendo consoles now aren't going to switch just for a new game or two. They need those ports to sweeten the deal.
 
The GPU is the limiting factor in the sense that while it could output four video feeds (BW wouldn't really be the issue), it wouldn't be able to render "lots" of data to four screens at the same time.

Theoretically a 4 player splitscreen with each player using the Upad should be possible though? The resolution added up would still be below 1080p, and you could just output a simple map or statboard onto the TV.

That would be awesome.
 
Here's what I was saying above

1 screen, 852x480 resolution, 60 frames per second
2 screen, 852x480 resolution, 30 frames per second
4 screens, 852x380 resolution, 15 frames per second

Fill rate in both cases are ~24.5Mpixels/s (not counting compression, which would decrease the data rate in either case). There would be more overhead for the latter, but perhaps not a lot.

I see various issues with my suggestion here, but I can't yet visualize any killing blows that would prevent this from working out.

(edit: just in case it gets lost on the last page, we know that the first of those three cases is possible)


http://www.abload.de/img/multiple_term_devicesxmfru.jpg

Could compression and/or "time division multiple access or frequency division multiple access" (<- someone cares to explain that) help?

Time division is sort of what I'm discussing. :)
 

Sadist

Member
A million copies of Chinatown Wars for a handheld as popular as the DS is just barebones.

Yes it might be a topdown GTA, but even the 3D GTA's on PSP sold beter. And that's saying something.
 

EatChildren

Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Are we forgetting Chinatown Wars sold the most on DS? A "kiddy Nintendo handheld," of all things. Each of those three guaranteeing GTA couldn't possibly sell on it.

I'm not arguing with you, I agree, I just think Rockstar would be shortsighted in passing on Wii U and being able to cash in on launch sales.

Chinatown Wars sold like ass everywhere though. That game is more an example of the isometric GTA market being dead, or the general style of the game appealing to too greater minority.

And, as usual in cases like this, it also happens to be the only GTA game I've truly loved since GTA2 :(.

And now we find ourselves here, in the middle of another Wii drought as everybody else gets hyped up for Max Payne 3, Dragon's Dogma and Diablo 3.

The Wii is dead. Kinda dumb for Nintendo to let it get to this state, but as it is there's probably no point releasing anything significant. Lots of late ports are filling the gaps, but they're gearing up for the Wii U.

While trying to fix the 3DS.

The main problem is that we don't live in the planet of third party AAA esclusive anymore.

That's why they should get their own exclusives. Saddle up with some independent devs, bulk up Retro, do whatever. Get some exclusive Nintendo IPs made. Spend that mulla!

I do agree though that it's important to get AAA third party games on the system, full stop. But in the case of Rockstar, I'm just saying there's a line. A line between economic, intelligent use of money and giving in to stupid publisher demands.

I just want Nintendo to prove to the world that Wii U is a serious platform that everyone should consider, rather than an expensive secondary console. Missing out on GTA would prove that Nintendo doesn't care about third-party support at all, and guarantee that we're going to get another Wii. Nintendo has too much to prove now. They need both the ports and IPs to call their own for that audience. Those people aren't going to switch just for an unproven IP. If anything, due to the fact that Nintendo already has a corrupted image, ports of big games might do more for them than new IPs unless Nintendo spends a fuckton on marketing. People that don't buy Nintendo consoles now aren't going to switch just for a new game or two. They need those ports to sweeten the deal.

If they 'prove' anything it wont happen overnight, let alone at E3. It will have to take time. I don't think it's entirely up to Nintendo to secure GTA, and if they miss out, I don't think it proves they don't care. What will prove they care or not will be how they handle the big picture. Missing out on GTA isn't a big deal when other publishers are delivering the goods. That, to me, would show that Nintendo does care, and knows how to spend their money intelligently.
 

ThatObviousUser

ὁ αἴσχιστος παῖς εἶ
A million copies of Chinatown Wars for a handheld as popular as the DS is just barebones.

Yes it might be a topdown GTA, but even the 3D GTA's on PSP sold beter. And that's saying something.

Considering it was top-down, the system it was on, and its overall budget, a million sold was probably easily enough to make a profit several times over.
 
A million copies of Chinatown Wars for a handheld as popular as the DS is just barebones.

Yes it might be a topdown GTA, but even the 3D GTA's on PSP sold beter. And that's saying something.

It says that people don't love GTA, they love 3D GTA. The series only came to popularity with GTA3, so a 2D GTA, no matter its quality would have never be able to compete.
 

Aostia

El Capitan Todd
That's why they should get their own exclusives. Saddle up with some independent devs, bulk up Retro, do whatever. Get some exclusive Nintendo IPs made. Spend that mulla!

I do agree though that it's important to get AAA third party games on the system, full stop. But in the case of Rockstar, I'm just saying there's a line. A line between economic, intelligent use of money and giving in to stupid publisher demands.


well, I agree with you almost on everything.
Will Nintendo too?

:D
 
So what are the big multiplatform games this year, and what are the chances the Wii-U will see them before the big Christmas buying season? I'm talking about the games that almost certain to sell millions due to the series popularity

-AC3, confirmed to be there

-RE6, they've been quiet about it, I'm gonna assume not at launch until otherwise

-GTAV, still not convinced this is even coming out this year, but EatChrildren summed it up pretty nicely

-CoD, all-but-confirmed at this point to be there in some form

-Bioshock Infinite, I am...unfamiliar with this one's status actually, maybe someone else knows

-Darksiders 2, it'll be there

-DoA5: The first multiplatform title in the series, but will the Wii-U be involved? They're getting NG3 and I think they're on good terms with Team Ninja, so I think its definitely possible.

-NBA 2013: Essentially the Madden of NBA, and will most definitely be on the Wii-U. This is a series that gets put out on as many systems as possible every year.

-DmC: The reception for this game grows more positive with every outing, and I'm willingly to bet it's gonna sell pretty nicely with a sizeable part of the fanbase being won over. Will the Wii-U get it? I'm gonna assume the status is the same as RE6, maybe not at launch, we'll see at E3 I suppose.

-Far Cry 3: It's an UbiSoft game, it'll be there

-Borderlands 2: ...who knows?
 

HylianTom

Banned
So what are the big multiplatform games this year, and what are the chances the Wii-U will see them before the big Christmas buying season? I'm talking about the games that almost certain to sell millions due to the series popularity

-AC3, confirmed to be there

-RE6, they've been quiet about it, I'm gonna assume not at launch until otherwise

-GTAV, still not convinced this is even coming out this year, but EatChrildren summed it up pretty nicely

-CoD, all-but-confirmed at this point to be there in some form

-Bioshock Infinite, I am...unfamiliar with this one's status actually, maybe someone else knows

-Darksiders 2, it'll be there

-DoA5: The first multiplatform title in the series, but will the Wii-U be involved? They're getting NG3 and I think they're on good terms with Team Ninja, so I think its definitely possible.

-NBA 2013: Essentially the Madden of NBA, and will most definitely be on the Wii-U. This is a series that gets put out on as many systems as possible every year.

-DmC: The reception for this game grows more positive with every outing, and I'm willingly to bet it's gonna sell pretty nicely with a sizeable part of the fanbase being won over. Will the Wii-U get it? I'm gonna assume the status is the same as RE6, maybe not at launch, we'll see at E3 I suppose.

-Far Cry 3: It's an UbiSoft game, it'll be there

-Borderlands 2: ...who knows?
Other than the NBA game, I have a hunch that, of the ones you list, the only ones that'll make it to the U are the ones already announced (Darksiders, Assassin's Creed) or heavily hinted at (CoD).
 

BurntPork

Banned
Chinatown Wars sold like ass everywhere though. That game is more an example of the isometric GTA market being dead, or the general style of the game appealing to too greater minority.

And, as usual in cases like this, it also happens to be the only GTA game I've truly loved since GTA2 :(.



The Wii is dead. Kinda dumb for Nintendo to let it get to this state, but as it is there's probably no point releasing anything significant. Lots of late ports are filling the gaps, but they're gearing up for the Wii U.

While trying to fix the 3DS.



That's why they should get their own exclusives. Saddle up with some independent devs, bulk up Retro, do whatever. Get some exclusive Nintendo IPs made. Spend that mulla!

I do agree though that it's important to get AAA third party games on the system, full stop. But in the case of Rockstar, I'm just saying there's a line. A line between economic, intelligent use of money and giving in to stupid publisher demands.



If they 'prove' anything it wont happen overnight, let alone at E3. It will have to take time. I don't think it's entirely up to Nintendo to secure GTA, and if they miss out, I don't think it proves they don't care. What will prove they care or not will be how they handle the big picture. Missing out on GTA isn't a big deal when other publishers are delivering the goods. That, to me, would show that Nintendo does care, and knows how to spend their money intelligently.
To you, fine. But Nintendo isn't trying to get you. They already have you. And you're right that it'll take time, and that's why Nintendo can't sit on their asses. They need as many huge games as possible right off the bat. If R* wants 10 mil for the port, it's an investment for the future.
 

MYE

Member
This thread is a colossal beast that refuses to die of hunger

It keeps moving on with absolutely NO NEWS lol
 

Donnie

Member
A million copies of Chinatown Wars for a handheld as popular as the DS is just barebones.

Yes it might be a topdown GTA, but even the 3D GTA's on PSP sold beter. And that's saying something.

Why is that saying something? The 3D GTA's on PSP also sold many times better than the PSP version of Chinatown Wars.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom