Support NeoGAF

[Graphics Horse]

(i know this is controllers, but still round =)).

For me, the question is more about why would they make a round or triangular console?

Looking at the black prototype on the left, it looks a better layout than the real thing. It was never really necesarry to have a Dpad on the top end.

 

[plainr_]

I love transparent casings and all but on the Wii-U, it looks terrible. The ugly disc drive just kills it.

 

[Yagharek]

There is one: 3rd Parties. They properly never ever want to go back to the times, where Nintendo had a lot of control over all the 3rd Parties by simply having the power to decide, who gets how much cards to which price. To escape Nintendo's dictatorship was one of the main reason, why many developers supported Sony's PlayStation.

Ahh yes of course. Silly of me.

What would a workaround be like if they could get the costs lower than CDs or production could be handled in external/third party production lines? Sort of how EA made their own megadrive carts back in the day, only in a more authorised sense of the word.

 

[test_account]

Yep, they are real Nintendo prototype Wii controllers indeed =)

i've seen this image linked about 2000 times and still i don't understand how you are supposed to use the star shaped controller.

I've been wondering the same thing. The only thing i can think of is that it was suppose to be an accessory controller for more kid oriented games (due to the colors and the shape of the controller, even if it is just a prototype). You use the buttons around the stars to select things on the screen (like using a d-pad) and you hit the big star in the middle as an action button.

 

[gamingeek]

You guys read the Digital Foundry piece on this?

 

[Jockel]

You guys read the Digital Foundry piece on this?

Well I didn't. Thanks for posting.

 

[y2dvd]

You guys read the Digital Foundry piece on this?

Blocked at work. ;[
Can you give a rundown on what was said?

 

[gamingeek]

Yea, I just love saving $5 PER YEAR on my game console power bill.

You should google this article I read a while back. It showed the power usage of the Wii versus 360 and PS3. The money you save is not trivial.

It came out to something like the price of two full price games a year difference.

Multiply that over the 5 year console lifecycle that is 10 games extra you can afford to buy on Wii because of the lower power consumption.

I'm not sure we live in the same country. Add that cost (all eaten up by electricity) to the base price of the 360 or PS3 when you bought it at launch.

 

[gamingeek]

Blocked at work. ;[
Can you give a rundown on what was said?

"The Wii U offers up the first Nintendo-designed multi-core console, but the team pointedly skirt around the number of cores featured (it is almost certainly three)."

"adopting the MCM strategy centralises heat on the mainboard. This makes it easier to dissipate heat with a less expensive cooling assembly, and helps immensely in making the Wii U a significantly smaller unit overall than the PS3 Slim or the Xbox 360S."

"here's where we stray into somewhat controversial territory, as it appears that the tri-core IBM CPU has less in common with the POWER7 "Watson" architecture we were promised, with plausible rumours suggesting a multi-core evolution of the same CPU found in the original Wii - and by extension, the 2001 vintage GameCube. If there's one thing that's rather striking about Nintendo's Wii U teardown it's the minuscule die area occupied by the CPU in relation to the relatively massive GPU from AMD.

In time, exact die sizes will be calculated by comparing the parts to standard-sized components elsewhere on the mainboard (the HDMI port, for example) but first impressions reinforce the current position that Wii U's design is skewed towards a more feature-rich graphics core with rather more modest CPU power. There will be comparisons with Microsoft's Xbox 360 integrated CPU/GPU which shows more balance in terms of die area between the two major components, but it's worth pointing out that Nintendo appears to have integrated its 32MB of eDRAM into the graphics core itself, while it remains a daughter die on the 360. Other functions - such as I/O - may also be integrated in order to centralise heat as much as possible.

And if there's one thing that stands out as even more surprising than the MCM implementation, it's the spartan nature of the mainboard: very basic indeed even compared to the revised PS3 CECH-400 super-slim motherboard. While there may still be some surprises on the reverse side of the mainboard, what we see on the face is very simply designed - and thus less expensive to build. Nintendo talks about power efficiency constantly in this Ask Iwata piece, but that goes hand in hand with overall production economics. It looks like an elegant design - something very, very different from the current generation consoles from Sony and Microsoft - and somewhat minimalistic too.

In the mainboard pictures Nintendo provides, we see the MCM module with metallic heatspreader surrounded by what looks like four memory modules (best guess is that these are DDR3 in nature, 512MB a piece), and the only other major chip appears to be at the rear of the board, next to the HDMI socket - so presumably a video output controller. We're quite curious as to where the wireless transmission technology is housed - the board itself looks rather sparsely populated to the point where you wonder if it couldn't be miniaturised still further."

 

[test_account]

You should google this article I read a while back. It showed the power usage of the Wii versus 360 and PS3. The money you save is not trivial.

It came out to something like the price of two full price games a year difference.

Multiply that over the 5 year console lifecycle that is 10 games extra you can afford to buy on Wii because of the lower power consumption.

I'm not sure we live in the same country. Add that cost (all eaten up by electricity) to the base price of the 360 or PS3 when you bought it at launch.

Do you have a link to this article? Or is it about the very early power consumption tests done at around 2007?

 

[Projectjustice]

The entire design of the Wii U is just so impressive. Completely polar opposite of the current gen systems and yet its more powerful. Love it!

Just makes waiting for Nov 18th harder!

 

[specialguy]

well 360/ps3 uses like 90 watts in games nowdays i think.

say you play 4 hrs a day every single day. It comes out to maybe 11KW/hours per month

I pay like 10c a KW/hour (probably higher in more socialist EU, but can only speak for myself)

So that's $1.10 per month, maybe $13 per year.

That's playing 28 hours per week gaming, and assuming Wii uses no electricity when playing (since I dont know what Wii draws). so real number is lower.

 

[gamingeek]

Do you have a link to this article? Or is it about the very early power consumption tests done at around 2007?

I read it ages ago, no link. I think it was comparing launch models not slim versions etc.

well 360/ps3 uses like 90 watts in games nowdays i think.

say you play 4 hrs a day every single day. It comes out to maybe 11KW/hours per month

I pay like 10c a KW/hour (probably higher in more socialist EU, but can only speak for myself)

So that's $1.10 per month, maybe $13 per year.

That's playing 28 hours per week gaming, and assuming Wii uses no electricity when playing (since I dont know what Wii draws). so real number is lower.

Yeah, it will vary on how much you play, your provider etc. The article was using a base number and using it for all 3 consoles, if you play less yeah the price will be lower. I got a new fridge a couple of weeks back, all the fridges in the dept had different star ratings for energy efficiency and told you how much cash in real terms it would cost to run it. It was quite eye opening, say you expect a fridge to last 5-7 years? Do the math on the savings vs another fridge and you can save a bundle.

 

[RPG_Fanatic]

i've seen this image linked about 2000 times and still i don't understand how you are supposed to use the star shaped controller.

It's the easy button. Press to drop a star and become invincible.

 

[test_account]

I read it ages ago, no link. I think it was comparing launch models not slim versions etc.

No problem. If it was the launch consoles, then i know about it =) The Wii had like 10 times less power consumption compared to PS3 and Xbox 360. It was money to be saved here indeed, especially if you played a lot. The newer PS3 and Xbox 360 model got their power consumption reduced quite a bit.

Personally i dont think that power consumption is deciding factor for buying or no buying when we talk about gaming system, but i remember going from 60GB PS3 to 120GB PS3 Slim, it was nice to know that the PS3 Slim used about 100watt less power than the 60GB PS3.

 

[codhand]

I get the feeling Iwata normally doesn't laugh so much at his employees jokes, like behind the scenes he's more like, hahah um no. =|

 

[gamingeek]

No problem. If it was the launch consoles, then i know about it =) The Wii had like 10 times less power consumption compared to PS3 and Xbox 360. It was money to be saved here indeed, especially if you played a lot. The newer PS3 and Xbox 360 model got their power consumption reduced quite a bit.

Personally i dont think that power consumption is deciding factor for buying or no buying when we talk about gaming system, but i remember going from 60GB PS3 to 120GB PS3 Slim, it was nice to know that the PS3 Slim used about 100watt less power than the 60GB PS3.

I'm the kind of gamer who buys a launch model and expects it to last 5 years you see. I wont buy a revision unless my old machine breaks down. Thankfully MS replaced my 360 when it got the RROD for free.

I agree I do not look at power consumption when buying a console, but it is a nice bonus when you tally up the potential savings. Cost of games is a lot, so if lower power consumption allows me to buy a couple more games a year, that's solid. If you buy late or pre-owned that's even more to play.

 

[test_account]

I'm the kind of gamer who buys a launch model and expects it to last 5 years you see. I wont buy a revision unless my old machine breaks down. Thankfully MS replaced my 360 when it got the RROD for free.

I agree I do not look at power consumption when buying a console, but it is a nice bonus when you tally up the potential savings. Cost of games is a lot, so if lower power consumption allows me to buy a couple more games a year, that's solid. If you buy late or pre-owned that's even more to play.

Same here. I didnt have plans on buying a PS3 Slim, but i bought one when my 60GB PS3 broke down (it was still under warranty, but i didnt want to get a PS3 Slim + games in return (new 60GB PS3s was taken of the market at this time), so i rather waited for the repair and bought a PS3 Slim instead, now i have two PS3s hehe. I dont regret it).

Yep, i agree. I simply like the idea of using less power if possible, even if the savings in money isnt that big for me.

 

[LegendofJoe]

It's hilarious how you're trying to make reduced energy consumption sound bad.

To me it's infuriating, but then again some people just aren't aware of what is happening with regards to the environment. Less truly is more if you care about your carbon and resource footprint.

 

[deviljho]

I get the feeling Iwata normally doesn't laugh so much at his employees jokes, like behind the scenes he's more like, hahah um no. =|

True, but I bet he's laughing up a storm at Investor Relations meetings.

 

[KojiKnight]

I think people are missing a key point to the power efficiency strategy that Nintendo employs... It's heat. Heat is the problem. Yes a few people mentioned heat and fan sounds as a reason, but it goes deeper than that. Heat kills electronics. Even with it's more powerful fans, the PS360 systems still ran hotter than the Wii (I think that's true even of the slim models) this makes the systems less reliable.

Besides the obvious of Nintendo then having to pay for more warranty repairs, and customers having to buy another console sometime in the current life cycle (see especially the x-box 360) it also cuts down on negative press and customer ill will (again, see RROD)

 

[Kai Dracon]

I think people are missing a key point to the power efficiency strategy that Nintendo employs... It's heat. Heat is the problem. Yes a few people mentioned heat and fan sounds as a reason, but it goes deeper than that. Heat kills electronics. Even with it's more powerful fans, the PS360 systems still ran hotter than the Wii (I think that's true even of the slim models) this makes the systems less reliable.

Besides the obvious of Nintendo then having to pay for more warranty repairs, and customers having to buy another console sometime in the current life cycle (see especially the x-box 360) it also cuts down on negative press and customer ill will (again, see RROD)

Nintendo likes making money (shocking, I know). One GREAT way to make money is to not waste money. Not having the reliability issues that something like the 360 suffered for years, would be a great way to make money.

As well, Nintendo has a certain reputation. They're rather Apple-like in areas such as "it just works". True story: among the 40 or so 'hardcore' gamers I'm acquainted with offline, in real life, about 10 of them won't buy an Xbox 360 or a PS3, even though they're interested in exclusive games. Because of the perception they're unreliable. 360 suffers far more there, obviously. But they see them as too much of a potential waste of money due to the firmly entrenched idea that they're poorly, cheaply designed, and require shelling out more money for a 2-3 year extended warranty to begin to feel safe. So they just play portables which tend to be naturally more rugged, and PC games.

Anecdotal, sure. But still, one in four. This stuff does matter to people out in the general population.

 

[zroid]

You guys read the Digital Foundry piece on this?

Awesome. Thanks for the link! ^_^

 

[Gemüsepizza]

It's hilarious how you're trying to make reduced energy consumption sound bad.

Is he? The thing is, it comes with a massive trade-off: The Wii U is not really powerful. Do you think it is worth it to pass on proper next gen graphics just to save a few watts?

 

[plagiarize]

Is he? The thing is, it comes with a massive trade-off: The Wii U is not really powerful. Do you think it is worth it to pass on proper next gen graphics just to save a few watts?

things like the bolded make me go 'lol'. as if 'proper' next gen graphics have always been the primary reason for buying a console. the Wii U is next gen. not being energy efficient comes with a massive trade off too. your console fucking breaks.

 

[KojiKnight]

Is he? The thing is, it comes with a massive trade-off: The Wii U is not really powerful. Do you think it is worth it to pass on proper next gen graphics just to save a few watts?

Call me a fanboy (I am, but I do own and enjoy my sony consoles too) but yes I'm okay with a cheaper more reliable Nintendo system even if it means less power. Nintendo games in HD are good enough for me... since I don't buy exclusively into 1 console, it doesn't matter to me.

The ONLY people this whole debate SHOULD matter to are those that only plan on buying 1 game console this generation and don't plan on having a good gaming PC. Everyone else will get their 3rd party games regardless, and those that care about system exclusive would have to buy different systems anyways to get them.

 

[fabricated backlash]

Is he? The thing is, it comes with a massive trade-off: The Wii U is not really powerful. Do you think it is worth it to pass on proper next gen graphics just to save a few watts?

Now we're up to define "Proper next gen graphics"

what a load of bollocks.

 

[soulassssns]

Call me a fanboy (I am, but I do own and enjoy my sony consoles too) but yes I'm okay with a cheaper more reliable Nintendo system even if it means less power. Nintendo games in HD are good enough for me... since I don't buy exclusively into 1 console, it doesn't matter to me.

The ONLY people this whole debate SHOULD matter to are those that only plan on buying 1 game console this generation and don't plan on having a good gaming PC. Everyone else will get their 3rd party games regardless, and those that care about system exclusive would have to buy different systems anyways to get them.

Nicely said.

Lol @ proper next gen graphics.

 

[User Tron]

The Wii U is not really powerful.

Please tell me more about the architecture of Wii U: Is it possibly to pass a CPU bound callback for an async GPU shader call? Can the GPU fire a CPU interrupt/soft trap after finishing shader code?

 

[Boss Doggie]

Is he? The thing is, it comes with a massive trade-off: The Wii U is not really powerful. Do you think it is worth it to pass on proper next gen graphics just to save a few watts?

Said "next gen graphics" hilariously can be found right now.

This is why I shake my head when people refer "next gen" as power.

 

[zroid]

I've already got one noisy, power-hungry monstrosity sitting under my TV (the PS3 fat model). I think I'll gladly take a quiet, energy-efficient and elegant design for the Wii U instead, thanks.

 

[Aizu_Itsuko]

The ONLY people this whole debate SHOULD matter to are those that only plan on buying 1 game console this generation and don't plan on having a good gaming PC. Everyone else will get their 3rd party games regardless, and those that care about system exclusive would have to buy different systems anyways to get them.

Not really.

Some people are interested in gaming and that may include console technology.

Nothing wrong with that.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Call me a fanboy (I am, but I do own and enjoy my sony consoles too) but yes I'm okay with a cheaper more reliable Nintendo system even if it means less power. Nintendo games in HD are good enough for me... since I don't buy exclusively into 1 console, it doesn't matter to me.

The ONLY people this whole debate SHOULD matter to are those that only plan on buying 1 game console this generation and don't plan on having a good gaming PC. Everyone else will get their 3rd party games regardless, and those that care about system exclusive would have to buy different systems anyways to get them.

I'm a fanboy and i think Nintendo could have had a better balance had they scrapped the tablet idea. I think the money saved from not having a screen on the pad could have gone to a better cpu and still have an effecient system.

What's the point of having an effecient low power console system if you need to get a pc with 500watt+ or a ps4/720 to enjoy 3rd party games. Look at what Nintendo did with the gamecube, i think they could have competed with ps4/720 and still be more effecient. It didn't use n64 or psx tech and was still cheap, elegant, and powerful. If you think gamepad is worth it then yes they did the best they could. I personally dont think the 2nd screen was worth it in the long run.

 

[Goodlife]

The ONLY people this whole debate SHOULD matter to are those that only plan on buying 1 game console this generation and don't plan on having a good gaming PC.

Hiya.

Will be a bit "gutted" if the WiiU is left behind this gen.
Want it to be in the same ballpark so it's possible to port to.

 

[KojiKnight]

Not really.

Some people are interested in gaming and that may include console technology.

Nothing wrong with that.

Yes, being interested in the debate is one thing... demanding that Nintendo go for more power is another. Those demanding more power out of the system likely...

A: Are hardcore and will likely have multiple consoles anyways, so 3rd party support is a non-issue.

B: Aren't going to get a Nintendo console anyways, and are just using the fact that it's "under powered" to further reassure themselves they don't want it (nothing wrong with this, if Nintendo doesn't make a system with what you want, it's all the more reason not to get it)

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Said "next gen graphics" hilariously can be found right now.

This is why I shake my head when people refer "next gen" as power.

No, it can't be found right now. Current games, even on PC, are not heavily relying on Shader Model 5. They are built for DX9 and DX10 with a few DX11 effects. Real next gen graphics will be all about SM5. You can get DX11 graphic cards for very little money right now, and I am sure as soon as the PS4 and Xbox 720 will be out, we will see the beginning of games that won't work without a DX11 card.

Please tell me more about the architecture of Wii U: Is it possibly to pass a CPU bound callback for an async GPU shader call? Can the GPU fire a CPU interrupt/soft trap after finishing shader code?

Oh please. What you are talking about is features, of course they can make a console faster - but am talking more about raw power. Look at the cooling solution: Does this look like a system, that will be able to compete with consoles which will release 1 year later, with over 4 times the size and packed with the latest technology?

 

[zroid]

What's the point of having an effecient low power console system if you need to get a pc with 500watt+ or a ps4/720 to enjoy 3rd party games. Look at what Nintendo did with the gamecube, i think they could have competed with ps4/720 and still be more effecient. If you think gamepad is worth it then yes they did the best they could. I personally dont think the 2nd screen was worth it in the long run.

The thing is though Nintendo doesn't want to compete directly. That's why the GamePad exists. It will either succeed or fail, but either way, they don't believe a GameCube 2 would succeed -- certainly not more than the GameCube itself did, which is to say it won't make a big impact.

With the GamePad, at least they're giving themselves another shot at Wii-like success -- which is a lot more than a direct 720 or PS4 competitor would allow.

 

[The_Lump]

I'm a fanboy and i think Nintendo could have had a better balance had they scrapped the tablet idea. I think the money saved from not having a screen on the pad could have gone to a better cpu and still have an effecient system.

What's the point of having an effecient low power console system if you need to get a pc with 500watt+ or a ps4/720 to enjoy 3rd party games. Look at what Nintendo did with the gamecube, i think they could have competed with ps4/720 and still be more effecient. It didn't use n64 or psx tech and was still cheap, elegant, and powerful. If you think gamepad is worth it then yes they did the best they could. I personally dont think the 2nd screen was worth it in the long run.

Of course they could have competed technically, they're more than capable. But why? What's the incentive for people to buy it over the next Xbox or PlayStation? It's about differentiation, USPs etc. Nintendo are trying to go it alone and make their own market, exactly like the Wii (but this time with the ability to share games with the other two....)

 

[The_Lump]

No, it can't be found right now. Current games, even on PC, are not heavily relying on Shader Model 5. They are built for DX9 and DX10 with a few DX11 effects. Real next gen graphics will be all about SM5. You can get DX11 graphic cards for very little money right now, and I am sure as soon as the PS4 and Xbox 720 will be out, we will see the beginning of games that won't work without a DX11 .....

No it's funny because "next gen graphics" are impossible to achieve in the present. Otherwise they wouldn't be "next" generation. It's paradoxical

 

[Boss Doggie]

No, it can't be found right now. Current games, even on PC, are not heavily relying on Shader Model 5. They are built for DX9 and DX10 with a few DX11 effects. Real next gen graphics will be all about SM5. You can get DX11 graphic cards for very little money right now, and I am sure as soon as the PS4 and Xbox 720 will be out, we will see the beginning of games that won't work without a DX11 card.

They can be achieved, but of course due to the need to cater to consoles they have to be reworked. Hell, those stuff Ubisoft were shown running in PC.

No it's funny because "next gen graphics" are impossible to achieve in the present. Otherwise they wouldn't be "next" generation. It's paradoxical

Which is why next-gen being referred to anything outside of categorizing time is stupid

 

[Bluemercury]

No, it can't be found right now. Current games, even on PC, are not heavily relying on Shader Model 5. They are built for DX9 and DX10 with a few DX11 effects. Real next gen graphics will be all about SM5. You can get DX11 graphic cards for very little money right now, and I am sure as soon as the PS4 and Xbox 720 will be out, we will see the beginning of games that won't work without a DX11 card.



Oh please. What you are talking about is features, of course they can make a console faster - but am talking more about raw power. Look at the cooling solution: Does this look like a system, that will be able to compete with consoles which will release 1 year later, with over 4 times the size and packed with the latest technology?

The next consoles wont use the latest technology. not technically....pc's dont have space limitations....you will only fit the latest tech on a big box....

 

[plagiarize]

No, it can't be found right now. Current games, even on PC, are not heavily relying on Shader Model 5. They are built for DX9 and DX10 with a few DX11 effects. Real next gen graphics will be all about SM5. You can get DX11 graphic cards for very little money right now, and I am sure as soon as the PS4 and Xbox 720 will be out, we will see the beginning of games that won't work without a DX11 card.

what do you really expect to see from SM5 that 3 or 4 couldn't do? performance wise SM5 is a large improvement. capability wise though? very little difference.

 

[MrCunningham]

Yeah first thing I thought as well. Though I wouldn't expect anything else from Nintendo.
The mainboards in all their consoles from the N64 and forward have all been very elegantly designed.

Edit: Added pictures, because why not?

Nintendo 64:

Gamecube:

Wii:

This is the reason why NIntendo always makes a profit on each console that they sell. Their architecture is so neat and orderly and they don't shovel a lot of needless silicone into their machine that drives manufacturing costs up. The innards of the Wii U looks so clean from an engineering standpoint.


For comparison sake, here is the Sega Saturn motherboard:

Check out all those co-processors and silicone.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Of course they could have competed technically, they're more than capable. But why? What's the incentive for people to buy it over the next Xbox or PlayStation? It's about differentiation, USPs etc. Nintendo are trying to go it alone and make their own market, exactly like the Wii (but this time with the ability to share games with the other two....)

The same thing that has always carried them, nintendo games. Gamecube wasn't a huge sucess because it lacked a gimmick it was the lack great nintendo games early. You can't say all i want is a console good enough to play nintendo games then say they need a gimmick to stand out.

 

[Bony Manifesto]

Of course they could have competed technically, they're more than capable. But why? What's the incentive for people to buy it over the next Xbox or PlayStation? It's about differentiation, USPs etc. Nintendo are trying to go it alone and make their own market, exactly like the Wii (but this time with the ability to share games with the other two....)

But don't you think those two aims are entirely opposed to each other? I totally agree that Nintendo is going their own way, and doesn't care at all about what their competitors are doing, but that's precisely why I think this notion of the Wii U getting marginally-downgraded ports from Sony and Microsoft's new consoles is so naive. Looking at the way the Wii U has been designed, I think it's clear exactly how conservative Nintendo have been with the hardware they chose. I don't think Nintendo are even trying to be in the same ballpark as the other next-gen consoles.

 

[KojiKnight]

But don't you think those two aims are entirely opposed to each other? I totally agree that Nintendo is going their own way, and doesn't care at all about what their competitors are doing, but that's precisely why I think this notion of the Wii U getting marginally-downgraded ports from Sony and Microsoft's new consoles is so naive. Looking at the way the Wii U has been designed, I think it's clear exactly how conservative Nintendo have been with the hardware they chose. I don't think Nintendo are even trying to be in the same ballpark as the other next-gen consoles.

Honestly, I don't see Nintendo getting downports of new games. I don't see how it would be profitable for ANYONE involved... No, instead Nintendo is going to feed off of it's own exclusives and UP-ported PS360 games which will continue to exist for several more years (see PS2 -> Wii ports that plagued Wii the first 2-4 years). Those games will not be A quality, but it'll be enough for Nintendo and third party devs...

Again, hardcore nintendo fanboy here. This isn't a negative nancy stance, I think it's a realistic and PROFITABLE stance. Nintendo is going to continue producing it's own games, grabbing good exclusives to push it's own agenda, and relying on "hand me downs" and mini-game fests and they'll make millions and I'll be happy enough as long as I get my marios and zeldas. No joke, no sarcasm.

 

[Mudkips]

Does this look like a system, that will be able to compete with consoles which will release 1 year later, with over 4 times the size and packed with the latest technology?

Did the Wii look like a system what was able to compete with the PS3 or 360?
How many units did the Wii sell? How much money is Nintendo rolling in?

If you want graphics, get a PC.
If you want games, get games you want, and whatever hardware is necessary to play them.
If you want to talk about the technical merits of each console and how that relates to their ability to compete in the market, history says you're on the wrong side of that debate.

 

[Projectjustice]

I'm a fanboy and i think Nintendo could have had a better balance had they scrapped the tablet idea. I think the money saved from not having a screen on the pad could have gone to a better cpu and still have an effecient system.

What's the point of having an effecient low power console system if you need to get a pc with 500watt+ or a ps4/720 to enjoy 3rd party games. Look at what Nintendo did with the gamecube, i think they could have competed with ps4/720 and still be more effecient. It didn't use n64 or psx tech and was still cheap, elegant, and powerful. If you think gamepad is worth it then yes they did the best they could. I personally dont think the 2nd screen was worth it in the long run.

Well Im glad you arent running Nintendo.

 

[Fess]

Great Iwata Asks as usual, I just love that they go into so much details.

 

[Grampa Simpson]

um.... now here's the thing.

i'm going to preempt my own response by saying "-yes- but that doesn't make you the fucking oracle of everything Japan", but anyways.

I've lived in Japan for 13 years.

The crux of my CAPSRAGE is simply the whole "Well, in Japan..." and a spluttered set of reasoning that i don't think holds and whilst circa 3/11 it became an issue for Japan with setsuden on the decline it's just not that big of a deal. The Wii U draws the power it does because that's the power it needs - and that's it.

DCharlie just shot himself in the foot. I don't know how much the rest of you know about Japanese culture (I'm an expert), but honor and shame ..