• 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.

Wii U clock speeds are found by marcan

User Tron

Member
Personally, I couldn't care less. Maybe I'm getting old, but graphics just don't matter to me anymore. Give me a fresh game. Something different. Something creative. If Nintendo can provide me with that with the tablet, I'm happy.

I watched Agni’s Philosophy Demo and was impressed by the graphics, then I thought about a game with the graphics. I could care less. As you wrote: Give me a fresh game and i'm all in.
 

Fredrik

Member
Be honest, people: If you owned either the PS3 or 360, did you ever consider buying the same 3rd party game on the Wii? No...and why would anyone? The WiiU will not buck that trend.
It will buck that trend as long as Sony and MS keep holding on to the current generation. I plan to play ME3, Darksiders 2, AC3, Tekken Tag 2, Alien CM on WiiU instead of PS3/360.
Once PS4/720 is out I might do otherwise though, but that depends on how much better the games are there and if the console have interesting selling points besides higher specs. If I end up liking WiiU a lot I might need more than sparkles and individual strands of hair and beard to go back to single screen gaming again.
 
I'm definitely not suggesting that. The fact that a new console has trouble running 360 ports at parity is legitimately troubling, as are the various CPU criticisms.

Yeah I didn't suggest you were guilty if that. I'm just challenging the notion that we should trust HAL_Laboratory's narrative that the system is powerful based on what "insider's" are currently saying, but nobody's demonstrated as of yet.
 

Doc Holliday

SPOILER: Columbus finds America
2. Small form factor...it's not actually that small...it's as big as OG Xbox! Both the 360 and PS3 slims are smaller and more powerful by the looks of it.

Ok this is probably the silliest thing i've read in a while. The Wii U had many shortcomings but being bigger than the OG xbox is not one of them.
 

Threi

notag
Be honest, people: If you owned either the PS3 or 360, did you ever consider buying the same 3rd party game on the Wii? No...and why would anyone? The WiiU will not buck that trend.
All shooters control far better on the Wii than on PS3 and 360 (well until move arrived)

so...yeah, there was that. Given the choice though PC gets top priority unless I can live with the controls (like borderlands for example)
 

Doc Holliday

SPOILER: Columbus finds America
Wrong, the $199 kindle fire hd actually has innards and isn't just a streaming device:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0083PWAPW/?tag=neogaf0e-20 <-- destroys the Wii U pad

that was a terrible, ill-informed post, grampa.

The innards are in the Wii U console which is included in the 299 price. This argument never made sense to me. If anything it costs more to include advanced streaming tech that is being used.

Edit: Ooops sorry Heavy misread your post.

Moved on and then released an HD console in hopes to grab the same market who's shunned Nintendo for a couple gens?

You want them to make the Wii U an SD console? Only hardcore players care about HD?
 
I'm just challenging the notion that we should trust HAL_Laboratory's narrative that the system is powerful based on what "insider's" are currently saying, but nobody's demonstrated as of yet.
Why are you putting words in my mouth man? I never said the system was powerful. You're taking what I said out of context. Not cool. Next time a world-class dev says good things about a system I should just not say anything I guess. I had more faith in GAF but I should have known better.
 

Kilrogg

paid requisite penance
So is this good, bad, or average?

Cause I seem to recall certain tech demos running fine and ports running, well, not as well to be sure, but not so poorly that the system seemed a whole league below the PS360. Isn't the system as capable as those consoles for all intents and purposes?

I'm honestly asking cause I can't take much from those marcan quotes.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Or been left behind, depending on your perspective.

Still, there's always those impressive sales to tout.

Which is why Nintendo went with what they did in the Wii U.

The Wii explosion of popularity showed them that Average Joe Consumer could care less about graphics/RAM/clock speed. As a result, we got this thing. I like it, don't get me wrong, but, to me, it's a system that I'll have in addition to one of the other two new ones.
 

PhantomR

Banned
Or been left behind, depending on your perspective.

Still, there's always those impressive sales to tout.


So we've devolved into pretending that sales aren't important anymore?


If anything, this shows that NEOGAF and this silly "hardcore gamer" mindset has been left behind. Not Nintendo.
 

test_account

XP-39C²
From my 6 or so months here, utilities are absolutely terrible.
Where i live, there wouldnt be that much to save. If i use WiiU 4 times each day in one month (30 day month) and the load on the WiiU is 75W all the time, it will cost me about $1.4 US dollars. If the WiiU had used 100W instead, it would cost me about $1.7. I would be saving 30 cents a month on this.
 

Combichristoffersen

Combovers don't work when there is no hair
So is this good, bad, or average?

Cause I seem to recall certain tech demos running fine and ports running, well, not as well to be sure, but not so poorly that the system seemed a whole league below the PS360. Isn't the system as capable as those consoles for all intents and purposes?

I'm honestly asking cause I can't take much from those marcan quotes.

More RAM than PS360, but it's slower.
Better GPU than PS360.
The CPU has a lower clock speed, but is more modern so it adds up to being about on par or slightly better.

I'm no techhead, but I guess it should overall be on par with PS360, but since it's so GPU-reliant it makes for bad ports when devs try to dump CPU-reliant PS360 code directly on Wii U. Ports need to be reworked to get the best out of the Wii U.
 

Orayn

Member
yea thats not even close to factual. tons of people hate motion controls. "Far Better" reflects personal preference and nothing more.

Would you respond the same way to someone who said that shooters control far better on PC? I mean, that the mouse isn't better than an analog stick.
 

DynamicG

Member
Get that troll bait shit outta here man. You know damn well sales are what it's all about. These are global corporations, not sports teams.

Dave's one of those guys who thinks that hardware power is always more important. He only sees things from his individual consumer perspective and doesn't really care to think about "big picture" stuff like sales. He likes his gadgets an tech. It's a totally valid perspective, it just doesn't make for fun discussion.
 

SmokyDave

Member
So we've devolved into pretending that sales aren't important anymore?
I own a Vita. What do you think?

Get that troll bait shit outta here man. You know damn well sales are what it's all about. These are global corporations, not sports teams.
Sales matter to the corporation, not the consumer. Unless you're discussing the viability of sequels which doesn't seem terribly applicable to Nintendo.

Dave's one of those guys who thinks that hardware power is always more important. He only sees things from his individual consumer perspective and doesn't really care to think about "big picture" stuff like sales. He likes his gadgets an tech. It's a totally valid perspective, it just doesn't make for fun discussion.
Precisely. The unit sales of a piece of hardware have never enhanced my enjoyment of a game but beefy specs sure as fuck have.
 

bachikarn

Member
Which is why Nintendo went with what they did in the Wii U.

The Wii explosion of popularity showed them that Average Joe Consumer could care less about graphics/RAM/clock speed. As a result, we got this thing. I like it, don't get me wrong, but, to me, it's a system that I'll have in addition to one of the other two new ones.

So why even make the Wii U as powerful as it is? Why not literally just make an HD Wii with a tablet controller?
 
You want them to make the Wii U an SD console? Only hardcore players care about HD?

Of course I want the Wii U to be HD. My comment was directed at a person who seems to believe that Nintendo isn't competeing with MS / Sony.

You honestly think the Wii U is being realesed without a care in the wrold about Sony's and MS's products? You really think the HD Wii and it's press about 3rd party support isn't an attempt get some of Sony's and MS's fans to jump ship?
 

Pie and Beans

Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
Dave's one of those guys who thinks that hardware power is always more important. He only sees things from his individual consumer perspective and doesn't really care to think about "big picture" stuff like sales. He likes his gadgets an tech. It's a totally valid perspective, it just doesn't make for fun discussion.

So the normal person point of view then, not the bizarre cheerleading for one logo over another variety?

As a consumer and presumably not a stockholder or employee, why wouldnt you want to praise the people giving you everything you wanted and more and see that succeed? Nintendo will never have any reason to build an acceptable-for-that-year box because such a huge population of people will evangelise every single aspect of the things they punt out like they were forged according to the words from some holy text.

The "big picture"? Crimany.
 

Kilrogg

paid requisite penance
More RAM than PS360, but it's slower.
Better GPU than PS360.
The CPU has a lower clock speed, but is more modern so it adds up to being about on par or slightly better.

I'm no techhead, but I guess it should overall be on par with PS360, but since it's so GPU-reliant it makes for bad ports when devs try to dump CPU-reliant PS360 code directly on Wii U. Ports need to be reworked to get the best out of the Wii U.

Thanks, makes sense. So what is all the commotion about? That Nintendo went with unspectacular hardware? How is that a surprise after the Wii (v. PS360) and 3DS (v. Vita)? Or is it because of the price? Because in that case I share the dissatisfaction, but only because no system should be priced that high in this troubled economy, especially after the Wii and the tepid sales of the 3DS.
 

Fredrik

Member
So is this good, bad, or average?

Cause I seem to recall certain tech demos running fine and ports running, well, not as well to be sure, but not so poorly that the system seemed a whole league below the PS360. Isn't the system as capable as those consoles for all intents and purposes?

I'm honestly asking cause I can't take much from those marcan quotes.
Look at AC3 for example, note that it's the first WiiU game made by the developer, a port of a highly optimized 360/PS3 engine, and know that we always see increases in performance in game engines over time. WiiU will do just fine compared to PS3/360. :)

The uphill battle starts when PS4/720 is out. Might end in a slaughter, or in a Wii like situation where you'll at least get gameplay originallity on WiiU that you simply can't get anywhere else, until Sony try to copy it...
 

Kai Dracon

Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
Which is why Nintendo went with what they did in the Wii U.

The Wii explosion of popularity showed them that Average Joe Consumer could care less about graphics/RAM/clock speed. As a result, we got this thing. I like it, don't get me wrong, but, to me, it's a system that I'll have in addition to one of the other two new ones.

To be fair, I think it's a little more accurate to say that Nintendo seems to feel they don't have to leave their traditional comfort zone to make a successful video game console.

The problem's always been that gamers see Nintendo has having stopped competing. It's more that the costs of dedicated, enthusiast-oriented game devices kept going up and finally left Nintendo's price range. The bleeding edge left them behind.

There were actually too conservative with the Wii, IMO. I think their reservations were actually justified, but as they didn't know if the Wii experiment would work, they lowballed it a tad much. Had the Wii been a tad more powerful and supported basic HD output it might have smoothed over the disconnect between Nintendo and where 'hardcore' gaming was going a bit more.

For all that it is now being said "Wii U is Wii all over again", Wii U, even at launch with the stuff we've got to work with so far, is not as out of step as the Wii was. It outputs visuals at current standards for displays, it appears capable of producing content that the mainstream and even genuinely average core games (as opposed to the elite, the enthusiasts, and the leading edge) seems happy with.

The weird part is that finding this out about the CPU actually has me more intrigued than panicked. It seems clear that something about the console's design concept is working due to the performance it's outputting with day zero software. I'm actually more confident about its capabilities as far as native games go, and its ability to make use of the gamepad while running impressive games. No, I didn't just buy one for Nintendo's first party software. I'm interested in the fundamental system concept, and stuff like ZombiU is proving my interest was well founded.
 
I own a Vita. What do you think?

Sales matter to the corporation, not the consumer. Unless you're discussing the viability of sequels which doesn't seem terribly applicable to Nintendo.

Sales matter for the viability of continued software, period. As a Vita owner, I suspect you'll get to learn that in the next year or two if it doesn't pick up.
 

Combichristoffersen

Combovers don't work when there is no hair
Thanks, makes sense. So what is all the commotion about? That Nintendo went with unspectacular hardware? How is that a surprise after the Wii (v. PS360) and 3DS (v. Vita)? Or is it because of the price? Because in that case I share the dissatisfaction, but only because no system should be priced that high in this troubled economy, especially after the Wii and the tepid sales of the 3DS.

Mostly that Nintendo is releasing a 2012 console with HW specs that aren't much better than consoles released in 2005/2006, yeah. Add launch ports of debatable quality, slow OS and NNIN accounts being locked to your console, and it's a pretty bad launch period for Nintendo. The HW specs are also cause for alarm in regards to third party support, as it might be there now, but what'll happen when the next Sony and Microsoft consoles are out?
 

DynamicG

Member
So the normal person point of view then, not the bizarre cheerleading for one logo over another variety?

As a consumer, why wouldnt you want to praise the people giving you everything you wanted and more? Nintendo will never have any reason to build an acceptable-for-that-year box because such a huge population of people will evangelise every single aspect of the things they punt out like they were forged according to the words from some holy text.

The "big picture"? Crimany.

The big picture means looking at things from multiple levels. For example I am an individual that buys things. I am a consumer. That is one frame of reference.

At the same time,I buy things from large corporations that have to think about things like sales. They have to think about costs and all kinds of other things that only matter to their perspective. I'm also someone who enjoys thinking about organizations and how they function. It's part of my line of work.

So, I don't always HAVE to see things as a consumer. Sometimes it's fun to put on different caps and think about things from different angles. The human brain is amazing.

Of course I want everything I want and more. But many years on this earth have taught me that things don't always go that way. Nuance is a thing that exists, try it sometime.
 
Sales matter to the corporation, not the consumer.
Unless you care how the industry works, what philosophies are successful VS unsuccessful, what new trends are worth following or ended up being worth following, where the industry might be heading, where it's been, etc. There is a lot to be learned from sales. When I'm sitting in my living room playing games, I don't care. But when I'm shopping an idea to pubs, doing artwork for a studio or planning out a business strategy, yes, it matters for sure.
 

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
Combichristoffersen said:
The CPU has a lower clock speed, but is more modern so it adds up to being about on par or slightly better.

No it isn't, at least not in real-world application. Out-of-order execution is great for running sloppily compiled code efficiently, unfortunately the fact that its going to receive ported code optimized to run on in-order hardware is going to undercut that advantage substantially.

What you see in the specs is a system designed to run Nintendo games in HD res, no more, no less. Nintendo's key franchise titles are not that processor intensive; which isn't to say they have less merit, its just that you don't need masses of computation to make a better looking mario, just a solid GPU.
 

cRIPticon

Member
I don't deny that there may be a valid reason for them to have a more optimistic outlook on the hardware, probably being more familiar with it. I just also am highly skeptical of anecdotal evidence that suggests all of the criticism of the hardware currently is somehow null and void because of secondhand info of unannounced software. We don't all have to agree on anything here, or reach a consensus on how great or how terrible the hardware is. But in a thread where people are trying to reach conclusions about what the actual tech is powering the system, I just don't see the place for "nobody's shown anything yet, but people in the know are really liking what this puppy can do" here.

Yet you are basing your disappointment on the secondhand information given here about the processor architecture that has not looked at ANY balance of the system, optimizations made in the packages, efficiencies in the engines that my be afforded by such a platform, etc.
 
Top Bottom