Support NeoGAF

[JordanN]

Could Nintendo have released a ps4 lite with just the pro controllers and wiimote compatible for 350?

Maybe save money on the hard drive, blue-ray, and ram?

It wouldn't even have to be a PS4lite.

Release a more powerful PS4 in 2014/2015 for $300 or less (technology price goes down overtime).

And if people complain "that's too long", the Wii U is out and it does nothing. Nintendo could just rely on their 3DS profits like they're clearly doing now with the Wii U till that console arrived.

Better to have a proper next gen launch than a dead one.

 

[cloudyy]

It's both. The content and the device itself are linked. The cheapness factor only makes it easier for parents to get their kids what they want. If all tablets were $500, kids would still want them but parents would be much more reluctant to buy them what they want.

If it's both, isn't the content on iOS arguably better than on Android? At least in mind share it seems to be. Then why is the Android market share bigger? Seems to me like content isn't the main factor when you buy a tablet/smartphone.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

If it's both, isn't the content on iOS arguably better than on Android? At least in mind share it seems to be. Then why is the Android market share bigger? Seems to me like content isn't the main factor when you buy a tablet/smartphone.

Android still has a lot of content, especially if you are looking at free/trial stuff mostly. There are plenty of games of this type on android. Android also has the price advantage.

 

[AzaK]

Even when getting the truth out, price is just as big a obstacle. Parents are not fond of spending 300-350 for a console. MS and Sony are set to receive just as much heart ache, its only the hardcore who will put 400-500 into a console.

Which is why I still wonder if Nintendo should have put $50 more tech in the thing, sold for $400 and worried about the mainstream when costs dropped. Couldn't have been a worse position than now.

 

[ElectricKaibutsu]

Which is why I still wonder if Nintendo should have put $50 more tech in the thing, sold for $400 and worried about the mainstream when costs dropped. Couldn't have been a worse position than now.

More power would be nice but I think the Wii U not being x86 is what will cause it to miss out on multiplats next gen.

Edit: The hardcore complain about lack of power but lack of games is the Wii U's biggest obstacle imho.

 

[Paladin CL]

More power would be nice but I think the Wii U not being x86 is what will cause it to miss out on multiplats next gen.

Edit: The hardcore complain about lack of power but lack of games is the Wii U's biggest obstacle imho.

Making your console so underpowered that makes impossible to run next gen engines tend to do that... Nintendo had the exact same problem in the last gen, it was easy to see that WiiU was going to suffer of the same lack of third party support.
I think nintendo was more than fine with that, the problem is that the console did not success in hardware sale like Wii did, so the are not getting the quick cash out titles this time.

 

[CoffeeGames]

Making your console so underpowered that makes impossible to run next gen engines tend to do that... Nintendo had the exact same problem in the last gen, it was easy to see that WiiU was going to suffer of the same lack of third party support.
I think nintendo was more than fine with that, the problem is that the console did not success in hardware sale like Wii did, so the are not getting the quick cash out titles this time.

Actually, the Wii U can run next gen engines. CryEngine 3 was/is up and running on it, Unreal 4 can run on it. I'm guessing that FB3 can be made to run on it, with proper coding.

If capable developers like Treyarch were able to get the "HD" Call of Duty games to the Wii, there is no reason for another engine not to be able to make it to the Wii U (especially if they are running mobile versions), outside of a developer not taking the time, or knowing how, to do it.

We already have games like Trine 2 and Need for Speed: Most Wanted showing the Wii U is capable to deliver as good as, and better than, performance of the PS3 and Xbox 360 (which, yes, it should).

But, I'm not sure why people think the Wii U can't run "next gen" engines, when CryEngine 3 is running on it, and Unreal 4 was confirmed that it could be done on the Wii U, just that Epic (who didn't develop a Wii game) wouldn't be making a game for it using it. Perhaps developers should stop making excuses, and start providing examples. I believe that the first party titles will probably end up looking the best (like Metroid Prime 3 and Super Mario Galaxy for the Wii) though, while some third parties continue to act like they have no clue how to properly program/port.

 

[Raist]

Because those decisions were beyond Iwata's control, I felt that this was not a broken promise, but rather an unfortunate series of events.

He's the head of Nintendo. That includes a lot of first party teams who haven't released anything recently (2-3 years). what have they been doing exactly? Nintendo was completely unprepared for the launch, that's pretty clear. And they know full well they can't count that much on third parties. It's nothing new.

 

[Wickerbasket]

He's the head of Nintendo. That includes a lot of first party teams who haven't released anything recently (2-3 years). what have they been doing exactly? Nintendo was completely unprepared for the launch, that's pretty clear. And they know full well they can't count that much on third parties. It's nothing new.

It could be that they just had more trouble with HD development than they expected, which would also explain why a lot of games are coming out just before and after Christmas.

It doesn't really excuse the bad launch though, as they should have been aware of the pitfalls of HD development having watched other developers go through it.

I can't explain the OS at launch though, that shit was ridiculous.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

Actually, the Wii U can run next gen engines. CryEngine 3 was/is up and running on it, Unreal 4 can run on it. I'm guessing that FB3 can be made to run on it, with proper coding.

If capable developers like Treyarch were able to get the "HD" Call of Duty games to the Wii, there is no reason for another engine not to be able to make it to the Wii U (especially if they are running mobile versions), outside of a developer not taking the time, or knowing how, to do it.

We already have games like Trine 2 and Need for Speed: Most Wanted showing the Wii U is capable to deliver as good as, and better than, performance of the PS3 and Xbox 360 (which, yes, it should).

But, I'm not sure why people think the Wii U can't run "next gen" engines, when CryEngine 3 is running on it, and Unreal 4 was confirmed that it could be done on the Wii U, just that Epic (who didn't develop a Wii game) wouldn't be making a game for it using it. Perhaps developers should stop making excuses, and start providing examples. I believe that the first party titles will probably end up looking the best (like Metroid Prime 3 and Super Mario Galaxy for the Wii) though, while some third parties continue to act like they have no clue how to properly program/port.

Well, I wouldn't consider the the Wii version of Call of Duty games to be comparable to the HD twins/PC version in the slightest. Seriously, not even close. Fact of the matter is that the Wii has 2gb of slow ram with 1gb allocated to gaming. The PS4/NextBox will have at a minimum 4 times that amount. If you're truly expecting the Wii U to get the next gen games that were made FOR these systems, then I really don't know what to tell you. The Wii U WON'T be receiving most third party AAA games in two years from now IMO and you can quote me on that.

The Wii U is barely getting third party support before these next gen systems come out. Shoot, the Wii U is barely getting ports from the PS3/360 software. The Wii U will be DEAD in a couple years outside of Nintendo games and a few indies. Just like with the Wii.

 

[cand]

I don't know why developers this days think that saying things like that bring any merit for them. For me this only means "We don't know what to do with the plataform cause we're are not creative enough and we worry more about money" or "Our creativity is moved by money" .

I mean, I get it if you don't want to launch something for Wii U right now, it's not in good shape. But commenting things like "is collecting dust" is more sad for them... I'm not even asking for a port, which is what I think is their idea of working with the system, but they at least could start doing something minor for the eshop just as a exercise of fresh ideas.

Nah, better start flames on the internet...

 

[Wickerbasket]

I don't know why developers this days think that saying things like that bring any merit for them. For me this only means "We don't know what to do with the plataform cause we're are not creative enough and we worry more about money" or "Our creativity is moved by money" .

I mean, I get it if you don't want to launch something for Wii U right now, it's not in good shape. But commenting things like "is collecting dust" is more sad for them... I'm not even asking for a port, which is what I think is their idea of working with the system, but they at least could start doing something minor for the eshop just as a exercise of fresh ideas.

Nah, better start flames on the internet...

I think it says more about publishers than anything; the fact that they just aren't interested in supporting the Wii U right now.

The developers clearly state that they think it's a cool platform and want to do something, but that it isn't up to them. Taken from the quote from the OP:

We actually had some development kits that just collected dust. It's a bit sad, because we wanted to do something. I think it is a cool platform, but right now it's not just up to us. We want the game to reach as many as possible.

If interviewers stopped asking developers about Wii U support then they'd stop getting negative replies from developers.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

I think it says more about publishers than anything; the fact that they just aren't interested in supporting the Wii U right now.

The developers clearly state that they think it's a cool platform and want to do something, but that it isn't up to them. Taken from the quote from the OP:



If interviewers stopped asking developers about Wii U support then they'd stop getting negative replies from developers.

Yep. Avalanche is restricted from making games for the Wii U due to the install base. The install base is shit because of Nintendo.

 

[cand]

I think it says more about publishers than anything; the fact that they just aren't interested in supporting the Wii U right now.

The developers clearly state that they think it's a cool platform and want to do something, but that it isn't up to them. Taken from the quote from the OP:



If interviewers stopped asking developers about Wii U support then they'd stop getting negative replies from developers.

What about eShop games? A lot of indie studios are saying nothing but good things about Nintendo's approach. So why not do something smaller? Seems to me that they want to port Just Cause 2 but they are afraid it won't sell... and it probably wouldn't.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

What about eShop games? A lot of indie studios are saying nothing but good things about Nintendo approach. So why not do something smaller? Seems to me that they want to port Just Cause 2 but they are afraid it won't sell... and it probably won't.

Seems like Nintendo made more of an outreach to Indies than AAA studios.

 

[Chinpoko_Master]

Actually, the Wii U can run next gen engines. CryEngine 3 was/is up and running on it, Unreal 4 can run on it. I'm guessing that FB3 can be made to run on it, with proper coding.

If capable developers like Treyarch were able to get the "HD" Call of Duty games to the Wii, there is no reason for another engine not to be able to make it to the Wii U (especially if they are running mobile versions), outside of a developer not taking the time, or knowing how, to do it.

We already have games like Trine 2 and Need for Speed: Most Wanted showing the Wii U is capable to deliver as good as, and better than, performance of the PS3 and Xbox 360 (which, yes, it should).

But, I'm not sure why people think the Wii U can't run "next gen" engines, when CryEngine 3 is running on it, and Unreal 4 was confirmed that it could be done on the Wii U, just that Epic (who didn't develop a Wii game) wouldn't be making a game for it using it. Perhaps developers should stop making excuses, and start providing examples. I believe that the first party titles will probably end up looking the best (like Metroid Prime 3 and Super Mario Galaxy for the Wii) though, while some third parties continue to act like they have no clue how to properly program/port.

The full featured version? lol no. Why do you think Mark Rein laughed when someone asked him if the Wii U could run it?

Unreal Engine 4 could be done on the Wii U, but they'd have to strip so many features out that it would be nearly pointless. And if Epic isn't going to port their engine to the Wii U, nobody else is going to bother.

 

[cand]

So is easier to contact Nintendo if u r a studio that was created yesterday than a big studio with years of experience... really? Well, if that is the case, I think they could get information on how to cantact them with any indie studio that responds every email ever or attending to their GDC conference.

 

[Wickerbasket]

What about eShop games? A lot of indie studios are saying nothing but good things about Nintendo's approach. So why not do something smaller? Seems to me that they want to port Just Cause 2 but they are afraid it won't sell... and it probably wouldn't.

Maybe Nintendo's relations with big publishers aren't as good as with indie developers.

Indie developers also have to sell a lot fewer copies to be profitable so it might make more sense for them.

So is easier to contact Nintendo if u r a studio that was created yesterday than a big studio with years of experience... really? Well, if that is the case, I think they could get information on how to cantact them with any indie studio that responds every email ever or attending to their GDC conference.

Who knows why they don't have good communication with certain studios, I'm not psychic. Maybe they have a special contact for indie developers.

 

[CoffeeGames]

The full featured version? lol no. Why do you think Mark Rein laughed when someone asked him if the Wii U could run it?

Unreal Engine 4 could be done on the Wii U, but they'd have to strip so many features out that it would be nearly pointless. And if Epic isn't going to port their engine to the Wii U, nobody else is going to bother.

What features are those? Mark Rein is the one that ended up correcting his own statement, after he laughed, not before.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

So is easier to contact Nintendo if u r a studio that was created yesterday than a big studio with years of experience... really? Well, if that is the case, I think they could get information on how to cantact them with any indie studio that responds every email ever or attending to their GDC conference.

It's quite easy to contact Nintendo. Anyone can do that. He isn't talking about contacting Nintendo like you and I can. He's talking about contacting Nintendo in a way that would enable his company to get a contact of some sort.

I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo reached out to the Indies and not the AAA's because Indies are cheaper and require less powerful hardware. Also wouldn't shock me if Nintendo feels Indies are easier to domineer than AAA's.

Sony has also been getting rave reviews from Indies for the PS3, Vita, and PS4. The difference with Sony and Nintendo is Sony put forth hardware that appealed to both Indies AND AAA's while Nintendo basically gave AAA's a bit more powerful 360. Shit isn't going to fly going into next gen.

 

[cand]

Maybe Nintendo's relations with big publishers aren't as good as with indie developers.

Indie developers also have to sell a lot fewer copies to be profitable so it might make more sense for them.

But if they do a smaller game they will have to sell fewer copies too... I 'm not asking for a AAA title, I'm asking for a creative, simple and downloadable game. It's simple. That wall where big publishers don't have any support to do that is absurd for me....

 

[Chinpoko_Master]

What features are those? Mark Rein is the one that ended up correcting his own statement, after he laughed, not before.

Don't ask me. All I know is that you need at least 1 teraflop of power or something to run the full featured version of UE4. The Wii U doesn't have that much power, so it can't be done without making significant modifications to the engine.

And Mark Rein "corrected" his statement after a bunch of fanboys went for his throat on Twitter and made him apologize over nothing. He has said multiple times that UE3 is a better fit with the Wii U, and that he considers the Wii U to be in the same group with the PS3 and 360 in terms of power.

 

[Wickerbasket]

But if they do a smaller game they will have to sell fewer copies too... I 'm not asking for a AAA title, I'm asking for a creative, simple and downloadable game. It's simple. That wall where big publishers don't have any support to do that is absurd for me....

I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

Publishers don't want to support the Wii U because they don't think it will be profitable enough for them. Avalanche can't support the Wii U because publishers don't want to support the Wii U.

Avalanche aren't going to start making indie size games just to support the Wii U, that would be madness.

 

[Chinpoko_Master]

GC was before they realised they needed extras to keep up. Gamepad is that extra - a free tablet/gaming peripheral (with upcoming ios type apps too).

But that gamepad, its selling point, only appeals to people who want a lower price and more mario (how many people played galaxy or mario on wii again?). And way more ads.

why not save those ads for when next-gen's release gets the media attention back on the traditional gaming industry, in time for your christmas opportunity.

Lets be real, the Wii U is not a replacement for a real tablet. No app store, no capacitive touch screen, shitty low res screen, terrible battery life, and only works within a certain range.

 

[cand]

I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

Publishers don't want to support the Wii U because they don't think it will be profitable enough for them. Avalanche can't support the Wii U because publishers don't want to support the Wii U.

Avalanche aren't going to start making indie size games just to support the Wii U, that would be madness.

Why is this madness? Why they can't do smaller projects? If they really think Wii U is a cool plataform why don't create ideas for it ? Depending of the size of the project they can publish themselves.

They will not be doing for pity, to help or nothing like that. They will be just exploring new creative grounds without the headache of having to be absurdly profitable.

 

[Mastperf]

Why is this madness? Why they can't do smaller projects? If they really think Wii U is a cool plataform why don't create ideas for it ? Depending of the size of the project they can publish themselves.

They will not be doing for pity, to help or nothing like that. They will be just exploring new creative grounds without the headache of having to be absurdly profitable.

They have finite funds and staff. Depending on their current situation, they might not be able to do a vanity project. The next-gen is about to get underway and these devs likely have their hands pretty full.

 

[cand]

They have finite funds and staff. Depending on their current situation, they might not be able to do a vanity project. The next-gen is about to get underway and these devs likely have their hands pretty full.

So they should blame their situation, cause it's not impossible for them to do something that costs less money and can sell.

It's too easy to say that the plataform doesn't have enough installed base and don't do nothing to change that.

 

[Flightmare]

So they should blame their situation, cause it's not impossible for them to do something that costs less money and can sell.

It's too easy to say that the plataform doesn't have enough installed base and don't do nothing to change that.

It's not their responsibility to increase the install base...

 

[cand]

It's not their responsibility to increase the install base...

I didn't say it is. I said It's too easy to do that.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

So they should blame their situation, cause it's not impossible for them to do something that costs less money and can sell.

It's too easy to say that the plataform don't have enough installed base and don't do nothing to change that.

In a perfect world, every publisher and developer would have an infinite amount of funds and emloyees that would enable them to create and test all ideas, no matter the ROI potential. That isn't reality. Every publisher and every developer is limited in what they can do. This goes for Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo to EA/Activision/2K and every Indie on down. They're not going to spend money on an idea that would require they take a few employees off of existing projects just to test something out. It's Nintendo's job to make it profitable for these companies to be willing to invest in the Wii U, not the other way around.

I didn't say it is. I said It's to easy to do that.

No. It's obvious how you do it but it isn't easy to do.

 

[Wickerbasket]

I didn't say it is. I said It's too easy to do that.

I'm sure they could make iPhone games too and maybe make money that way, but, to put it simply, those those aren't the type of games they make.

The publisher's don't think the Wii U supports the type of games they publish and that's why it's not seeing more support from big third party publishers.

It's also ridiculous to suggest that only small, cheap games can be innovative and have new ideas.

The more ambitious the project, the more likely the costs increase.

 

[Mastperf]

So they should blame their situation, cause it's not impossible for them to do something that costs less money and can sell.

It's too easy to say that the plataform doesn't have enough installed base and don't do nothing to change that.

Time is money and small, cheap projects while less risky, are unlikely to generate much revenue. These small projects aren't gonna do anything to increase the WiiU userbase in any meaningful way. The software sales aren't there to make it worth the risk of pulling programmers and artists off bigger, likely more profitable projects.
At the end of the day the blame falls squarely at Nintendo's feet. It's their job to create a platform and development environment that make developers willing to support their platform. Nintendo is the one who is responsible with growing the userbase. They're the ones who have to provide showcase software and spend the money necessary to make their system a place that developers and publishers can make money.

 

[cand]

In a perfect world, every publisher and developer would have an infinite amount of funds and emloyees that would enable them to create and test all ideas, no matter the ROI potential. That isn't reality. Every publisher and every developer is limited in what they can do. This goes for Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo to EA/Activision/2K and every Indie on down. They're not going to spend money on an idea that would require they take a few employees off of existing projects just to test something out. It's Nintendo's job to make it profitable for these companies to be willing to invest in the Wii U, not the other way around.



No. It's obvious how you do it but it isn't easy to do.

I know that, what I'm saying is if they think they have good ideas there is not a unbreakble wall on the nintendo's front or public's front against them. The problem is, according to you, at moment THEY don't have enough funds to do anything for Wii U, smaller or not, the reasons can be whatever. If that's the case, say that.

I'm not defending Nintendo here, to be clear, I'm just saying that they shouldn't go the easy road of puting the blame in another person. Cause there are easier ways to do something for the Wii U. Now, if they really wanted to port Just Cause
for Wii U and that was their idea of "cool things" then we have a problem in the public's front...

It's also ridiculous to suggest that only small, cheap games can be innovative and have new ideas.

I didn't said that. I said AAA games are not the only way.

Time is money and small, cheap projects while less risky, are unlikely to generate much revenue. These small projects aren't gonna do anything to increase the WiiU userbase in any meaningful way. The software sales aren't there to make it worth the risk of pulling programmers and artists off bigger, likely more profitable projects.
At the end of the day the blame falls squarely at Nintendo's feet. It's their job to create a platform and development environment that make developers willing to support their platform. Nintendo is the one who is responsible with growing the userbase. They're the ones who have to provide showcase software and spend the money necessary to make their system a place that developers and publishers can make money.

When you create a smaller project you put all that in perpective. My point is, they said they're sad cause they think Wii U is a good plataform but is hard to reach Nintendo. That is the problem they presented. I'm saying that if they really want to do something they should find a way to do it. If don't then just say "We're not interested in doing anything for Wii U right now" is clean and objective.

 

[Wickerbasket]

I know that, what I'm saying is if they think they have good ideas there is not a unbreakble wall on the nintendo's front or public's front against them. The problem is, according to you, at moment THEY don't have enough funds to do anything for Wii U, smaller or not, the reasons can be whatever. If that's the case, say that.

I'm not defending Nintendo here, to be clear, I'm just saying that they shouldn't go the easy road of puting the blame in another person. Cause there are easier ways to do something for the Wii U. Now, if they really wanted to port Just Cause
for Wii U and that was their idea of "cool things" then we have a problem in the public's front...

Indie games can survive on fewer sales as there are fewer members of the team to pay. Avalanche doesn't make games like that, it's as simple as that.

They might have good ideas for the device, but without the income from the other two consoles it doesn't make business sense.

Again, I'm not psychic, but it's silly to assume it's bias that's stopping them from developing on the Wii U rather than simple business.

I just find it weird that your annoyed at the developer for the type of games they make. Are you annoyed when JRPG developers don't make AAA FPS games?

 

[Mastperf]

They might have been trying to reach Nintendo to work out a development deal. I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few studios have attempted to take advantage of Nintendo's current situation.

 

[cand]

Indie games can survive on fewer sales as there are fewer members of the team to pay. Avalanche doesn't make games like that, it's as simple as that.

They might have good ideas for the device, but without the income from the other two consoles it doesn't make business sense.

Again, I'm not psychic, but it's silly to assume it's bias that's stopping them from developing on the Wii U rather than simple business.

I just find it weird that your annoyed at the developer for the type of games they make. Are you annoyed when JRPG developers don't make AAA FPS games?

So you're saying that they can't do a AAA fps and a smaller FPS, or a AAA JRPG and a smaller JRPG? You have to change everything to do a indie game and go for another style? I don't think so...

Also I'm not annoyed by that, I'm annoyed by what they said.

 

[Wickerbasket]

So you're saying that they can't do a AAA fps and a smaller indie FPS? You have to change everything to do a indie game and go for another style? I don't think so...

Also I'm not annoyed by that, I'm annoyed for what they said.

Why would they split their resources? Especially for a system which hasn't shown to be profitable for larger third party teams.

Indie game sales wouldn't be able to support them.

There's a reason Wii U isn't seeing a lot of third party support from big publishers, and it's not because they're being stubborn, it's because they don't see it being profitable for them. The more people on your team, the more copies you need to sell to remain profitable.

Why would they make a small game for Wii U when they could make a game for a more profitable system? It's all about best use of resources.

Most publishers/developers don't think making Wii U games is a good use of resources.

 

[cand]

Why would they split their resources? Especially for a system which hasn't shown to be profitable for larger third party teams.

Indie game sales wouldn't be able to support them.

There's a reason Wii U isn't seeing a lot of third party support from big publishers, and it's not because they're being stubborn, it's because they don't see it being profitable for them. The more people on your team, the more copies you need to sell to remain profitable.

Why would they make a small game for Wii U when they could make a game for a more profitable system? It's all about best use of resources.

As I said, they should have said that and not put themselvess in the hero position where they have a lot of cool ideas and nintendo is blocking them. They don't do it beacause money. Period. Say that already.

 

[Wickerbasket]

As I said, they should have said that and not put themselvess in the hero position where they have a lot of cool ideas and nintendo is blocking them. They don't do it beacause money. Period. Say that already.

They didn't say Nintendo was blocking them, they said Publishers weren't interested in supporting the Wii U and that they depend on Publishers to publish their games.

Their lack of communication with Nintendo was a separate issue.

 

[Tiktaalik]

Could Nintendo have released a ps4 lite with just the pro controllers and wiimote compatible for 350?

Maybe save money on the hard drive, blue-ray, and ram?

This was their business model in the Gamecube era and it didn't work out for them at all. The Gamecube lacked frills the competing consoles had, such as a DVD drive, a harddrive and dedicated networking hardware. It helped sell the impression that the GC was an underpowered console (even though it wasn't really).

 

[cand]

They said is "hard to reach Nintendo" and is sad that the devs kits are collecting dust. And as I said, a smaller project can be published by themselves. If they don't have neither time or money to invest in a small project right now, then the problem is that they don't have the resources. Is not about publishers or anyone else but them.

 

[Wickerbasket]

They said is "hard to reach Nintendo" and is sad the the devs kits are collecting dust. And as I said, a smaller project can be published by themselves. If they don't have neither time or money to invest in a small project right now, then the problem is that they don't have the resources. Is not about publishers or anyone else but them.

They said Nintendo was hard to reach for them, and that they were able to make contact with Nintendo through another publisher. That's just a statement of their experiences. You can believe them or not, it doesn't really matter.

You don't seem to understand this point, why would they put resources into a small project? They don't make those types of games, that's not what they do.

You're literally complaining that they aren't a different type of game developer. There's a whole lot of difference in development between making a small project and a large project.

If the Wii U doesn't support the type of projects they make, then you can hardly blame the developer.

 

[CoffeeGames]

Don't ask me. All I know is that you need at least 1 teraflop of power or something to run the full featured version of UE4. The Wii U doesn't have that much power, so it can't be done without making significant modifications to the engine.

And Mark Rein "corrected" his statement after a bunch of fanboys went for his throat on Twitter and made him apologize over nothing. He has said multiple times that UE3 is a better fit with the Wii U, and that he considers the Wii U to be in the same group with the PS3 and 360 in terms of power.

I didn't realize Mark Rein would correct his statement, if it wasn't wrong. I know I don't go around saying things, and then changing my story, because a "fanboy" may not like what is said. If what was said the first time was true, there is no need to then say the Wii U can run Unreal 4. Either it can, or it can't.

Perhaps Mark Rein should learn to sell his engine to a wider audience, instead of to developers that might be developing games for consoles currently with no install base at all? From a business perspective, knowing what to say and how to say it the first time, and not having to continuously correct yourself, would be a good place to start.

I mean, if you have an engine, and you want people to use it, why wouldn't you know how to answer the question right the first time?

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

I didn't realize Mark Rein would correct his statement, if it wasn't wrong. I know I don't go around saying things, and then changing my story, because a "fanboy" may not like what is said. If what was said the first time was true, there is no need to then say the Wii U can run Unreal 4. Either it can, or it can't.

Perhaps Mark Rein should learn to sell his engine to a wider audience, instead of to developers that might be developing games for consoles currently with no install base at all? From a business perspective, knowing what to say and how to say it the first time, and not having to continuously correct yourself, would be a good place to start.

I mean, if you have an engine, and you want people to use it, why wouldn't you know how to answer the question right the first time?

Why should he sell his engine to be able to perform on a piece of hardware that won't be able to enjoy the type of effects that make the engine so impressive? As he said, UE3 is good for the Wii U, UE4 isn't.

 

[Amir0x]

CoffeeGames, Wii U cannot run an Unreal Engine 4 that is even close to being feature complete. Not even remotely. Therefore, it is incredibly disingenuous to try to suggest it can run the engine or to imply Mark Rein was changing his mind.

Sure, you can strip down UE4 and modify it so heavily as to make it pointless and then shove it on Wii U; but then it's UE4 in name only. Unreal Engine 3 is what will work on Wii U.

Time to deal with the underpowered nature of Wii U at this point already 'cause there ain't no going back

 

[StevieP]

CoffeeGames, Wii U cannot run an Unreal Engine 4 that is even close to being feature complete. Not even remotely. Therefore, it is incredibly disingenuous to try to suggest it can run the engine or to imply Mark Rein was changing his mind.

Sure, you can strip down UE4 and modify it so heavily as to make it pointless and then shove it on Wii U; but then it's UE4 in name only. Unreal Engine 3 is what will work on Wii U.

Time to deal with the underpowered nature of Wii U at this point already 'cause there ain't no going back

The Wii u is drastically underpowered in comparison to the ps4, but ue4 can run. Even as a stripped down entity. The reason for ue4 support is because the tool chain makes it a bit easier for developers. At least in theory. That's where the biggest feature advancements are in ue4. It would be for porting more than anything else. Thing is, rein and many other developers don't plan ports to my knowledge. That's the biggest reason rein made that statement. Not because the engine isn't scalable to that degree.

 

[AzaK]

It could be that they just had more trouble with HD development than they expected, which would also explain why a lot of games are coming out just before and after Christmas.

It doesn't really excuse the bad launch though, as they should have been aware of the pitfalls of HD development having watched other developers go through it.

I can't explain the OS at launch though, that shit was ridiculous.

I'm in the "Nintendo had to rescue the 3DS" camp. Basically the Wii U got bent over and shafted in order to secure Nintendo's core platform. As that stabilised they probably go back to allocating resources to the Wii U. Coupled with the troubles they say they are having, and EXTREME lack of foresight about HD development put them on a major back foot.

(Actually foresight wasn't required, anyone with a brain cell would know HD development would be a pain, 100's of companies went through it 5 years before)

 

[CoffeeGames]

The Wii u is drastically underpowered in comparison to the ps4, but ue4 can run. Even as a stripped down entity. The reason for ue4 support is because the tool chain makes it a bit easier for developers. At least in theory. That's where the biggest feature advancements are in ue4. It would be for porting more than anything else. Thing is, rein and many other developers don't plan ports to my knowledge. That's the biggest reason rein made that statement. Not because the engine isn't scalable to that degree.

The Wii U doesn't have as much RAM as the PS4, right? (Unless that changes before launch.) Do we know what the PS4 has on the graphics side? If the difference is minimal, will this be another "Xbox 360 vs. PS3" type comparison?

When you say "drastically", what are you basing that off of? The RAM? Examples of games running on the Wii U and the PS4? What do we have to go off of? I only have a few developers that have actually developed games for the Wii U, saying it is more powerful than the PS3 and Xbox 360, and I will go with their word because they have produced games that have backed up their claims when put to the test (Trine 2 and Need for Speed Most Wanted).

CoffeeGames, Wii U cannot run an Unreal Engine 4 that is even close to being feature complete. Not even remotely. Therefore, it is incredibly disingenuous to try to suggest it can run the engine or to imply Mark Rein was changing his mind.

Sure, you can strip down UE4 and modify it so heavily as to make it pointless and then shove it on Wii U; but then it's UE4 in name only. Unreal Engine 3 is what will work on Wii U.

Time to deal with the underpowered nature of Wii U at this point already 'cause there ain't no going back

Underpowered compared to what though? How big of a difference are we really talking about? That's what I'm asking. Are we talking PS2 to PS3 difference? Or, like a GameCube to Wii difference (very, very, very slight changes). Perhaps we're talking Crysis 3 on a high end PC to a low end PC? If the Wii U is more powerful than the Xbox 360 and the PS3, I don't see why it should be a problem getting any of the "next gen" games on the system.

Why should he sell his engine to be able to perform on a piece of hardware that won't be able to enjoy the type of effects that make the engine so impressive? As he said, UE3 is good for the Wii U, UE4 isn't.

He's in a business, and Unreal has mobile versions. So when doing presentations, I would imagine that presenting your engine as available/scalable to all platforms would make sense from the money/licensing perspective. There's a reason why so many developers are using Unity now though, and there's a reason why Epic is struggling with bad management so much they couldn't even keep Epic Baltimore open for more than six months...

 

[Zoramon089]

CoffeeGames, Wii U cannot run an Unreal Engine 4 that is even close to being feature complete. Not even remotely. Therefore, it is incredibly disingenuous to try to suggest it can run the engine or to imply Mark Rein was changing his mind.

Sure, you can strip down UE4 and modify it so heavily as to make it pointless and then shove it on Wii U; but then it's UE4 in name only. Unreal Engine 3 is what will work on Wii U.

Time to deal with the underpowered nature of Wii U at this point already 'cause there ain't no going back

Based on...what exactly? I don't remember Rein saying off of that nor do I remember any devs...

 

[Amir0x]

Underpowered compared to what though? How big of a difference are we really talking about? That's what I'm asking. Are we talking PS2 to PS3 difference? Or, like a GameCube to Wii difference (very, very, very slight changes). Perhaps we're talking Crysis 3 on a high end PC to a low end PC? If the Wii U is more powerful than the Xbox 360 and the PS3, I don't see why it should be a problem getting any of the "next gen" games on the system.

What do you think, CoffeeGames? I'm a little confused as to where you guys have been the last couple months at this point, but the PS4 massively outclasses the Wii U from a power perspective. it's almost comically more powerful. We won't know about Durango for 100% sure until two weeks from now, but all signs point to it being definitively more powerful than Wii U as well by a lot.

That's why virtually any developer you ask will say they consider Wii U far closer to the Ps360 power generation than the PS4/Xbox 3, and why Wii U is likely going to get shafted on virtually every port of true next-gen tech powered games that exist. They classed themselves out of the fight again. For strategic reasons, of course, ones that now appear to have failed for them catastrophically, as I illustrated pages ago.