Joe Molotov
Member
Is this supposed to be impressive or something? lol
If the Wii U is your only HD console.
Is this supposed to be impressive or something? lol
But how can you getaway with such a big lie and expect anyone to take you seriously. Marginally better? Let me guess PS4 is a marginal improvement over WiiU and 360/PS3. Because that was what the choir was pritching in those Wii U threads.
My apologies for being so blunt but i don't even know how to aproach such an outrageous statement.
Is this supposed to be impressive or something? lol
Iwata is aware of the fact that many people hold the belief that Wii U is underpowered, and feels they need to work on remedying such misunderstandings.
If the Wii U is your only HD console.
Talk about being in denial. It is underpowered.
But Nintendo shouldn't be trying to compete with the PS3 and 360; it won't win that fight, they already have huge libraries of games.Compared to what, exactly? PS4 & Durango? Sure. PS3 and 360? No.
A question was asked about what's going on with third parties on Wii U and the stigma concerning Wii U's "low power". Iwata responded by pointing to their initiative to "expand the range of software developers" noting that they've already received inquiries from several hundred new developers--both companies and individuals--following their presentation at GDC for Nintendo Web Framework. He believes new, captivating titles will be born from this initiative that'll help them achieve that goal.
Which 3rd parties were driven away by WiiU low power?Iwata cant be serious. I'm glad he's going after web and indie developers, but this can't be his answer to Wii U's low power driving away third parties.
FACK. This thread has morphed into something completely different from the OP. Only when it's Nintendo!!!!
Which 3rd parties were driven away by WiiU low power?
A question was asked about what's going on with third parties on Wii U and the stigma concerning Wii U's "low power".
But Nintendo shouldn't be trying to compete with the PS3 and 360; it won't win that fight, they already have huge libraries of games.
If the Wii U is your only HD console.
I totally understand the financial reasons for not putting games on Wii U, but aren't developers kind of shooting themselves in the foot? Putting a lot of current or cross-gen port on the console (at the same time as PS360) might have cultivated an audience that will be interested in more third party titles down the line. As it is they have completely eliminated an entire console as a possible source of revenue for the most part.
Why cultivate an audience if in 2 years all their games will be on Durango and PS4 and not WiiU compatible?
WiiU will be getting ports of PS360 titles for years and some unique games, think ports of RE5 and 6 and some special Wii U RE game not RE7.
Yeah, it will not be comparable to last-gen where we started with wall-guy, or whatever that was called. Developers have came a long way from that. The Wii U is new, though, and it take some time for developers to understand the unique specs of the system. In the case of Nintendo, they are still learning things that others had years of experience on. NBMBU and Nintendoland is just the beginning for them. We may see a significant boost for first-party efforts.I argue the type of performance increase we are seeing from ports compared to last gen is indicative of the overall power of the Wii U considering what we know about its specs. Clock speeds, power draw etc. Some may disagree but I don't see any grounds to argue the Wii U has a lot of room for improvement.
That kind of draw distance in an open world game? Sure is. That kind of fidelity at that range is a decent amount beyond what either the ps3 or 360 is capable of.Is this supposed to be impressive or something? lol
Didn't you saw the Battlefield 4 Q&A?Which 3rd parties were driven away by WiiU low power?
Didn't you saw the Battlefield 4 Q&A?
You mean from the same publisher that's been cutting and internally blocking Wii U support over bad blood? Yeah, like I'll believe that for a second.Didn't you saw the Battlefield 4 Q&A?
I knew this answer was coming. The hardware is one of the factors, there are others of course. But you can't expect DICE to ignore a close 140 million console sales when they already have the tech and toolset stablished for those platforms. Realitiy is, DICE didn't even bother to do any significant R&D on the Wii U, even before release, due to hardware specs. Just check out the laugh answer about the Wii U situation in that Battlefield 4 Q&A.Considering BF4 is on PS3/360 I wouldn't put that to any counts.
I knew this answer was coming. The hardware is one of the factors, there are others of course. But you can't expect DICE to ignore a close 140 million console sales when they already have the tech and toolset stablished for those platforms. Realitiy is, DICE didn't even bother to do any significant R&D on the Wii U, even before release, due to hardware specs. Just check out the laugh answer about the Wii U situation in that Battlefield 4 Q&A.
Same reason Epic is not porting UE4 to the console, so it will miss out games that only run on that engine. Or Crytek for that matter. You know the guys that before any publically known specs where pushing for the 8 GB for next gen will be nice.
I knew this answer was coming. The hardware is one of the factors, there are others of course. But you can't expect DICE to ignore a close 140 million console sales when they already have the tech and toolset stablished for those platforms. Realitiy is, DICE didn't even bother to do any significant R&D on the Wii U, even before release, due to hardware specs. Just check out the laugh answer about the Wii U situation in that Battlefield 4 Q&A.
Same reason Epic is not porting UE4 to the console, so it will miss out games that only run on that engine. Or Crytek for that matter.
That's why it is specified Unreal Engine 4 only games.That's not really the right phrasing. Or conclusion for that matter. They aren't "officially supporting" it, so if anyone with a UE4 engine'd game wants to bring said game to wiiu, they'll have to go it alone (ie no help from Epic, no tools specifically for wiiu sdk etc). Doesn't mean it won't get UE4 games, just that it'll be much less convenient for developers to port UE4 games to wiiu (making it less likely)
I knew this answer was coming. The hardware is one of the factors, there are others of course. But you can't expect DICE to ignore a close 140 million console sales when they already have the tech and toolset stablished for those platforms. Realitiy is, DICE didn't even bother to do any significant R&D on the Wii U, even before release, due to hardware specs. Just check out the laugh answer about the Wii U situation in that Battlefield 4 Q&A.
Same reason Epic is not porting UE4 to the console, so it will miss out games that only run on that engine. Or Crytek for that matter. You know the guys that before any publically known specs where pushing for the 8 GB for next gen will be nice.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/394067/we-had-crysis-3-running-on-wii-u-says-crytek-ceo/That's why it is specified Unreal Engine 4 only games.
The list above i compiled is very valid. Those are developers which the most important part of their busyness models rely in selling, at the begining on each gen, the toolsets that target highend platforms. It's their modus operandi, plain and simple, to the point that even console manufacturers make hardware decisions based in some of these guys suggestions. Wii U doesn't have the specs, so the attitude was to wait and see. Now, the console doesn't have the specs nor the sales so it's getting completly ignored. So yes, HardWare was a deciding factor.
. Since these games are showing up on the other systems though, selling power is likely way more important than better specs in this case. We will see what happens when the Wii U gets a good sized userbase and a better ecosystem for bigger third-party developers.That's why it is specified Unreal Engine 4 only games.
The list above i compiled is very valid. Those are developers which the most important part of their busyness models rely in selling, at the begining on each gen, the toolsets that target highend platforms. It's their modus operandi, plain and simple, to the point that even console manufacturers make hardware decisions based in some of these guys suggestions. Wii U doesn't have the specs, so the attitude was to wait and see. Now, the console doesn't have the specs nor the sales so it's getting completly ignored. So yes, HardWare was a deciding factor.
I'm not backing from any of my statements. Blu questioned if there was any developers that weren't supporting the console because of hardware. I presented some cases that point to that reality. The thing is life is not binary (black/white) like you want to paint it. Hardware among other factors contribute to some of these games not coming to the Wii U. So there's not just 1 everything or nothing reason, there are multiple ones.But first you said specs were the problem and now your saying it's the userbase...
Nintendo and EA got into a 'fight' That's why BF4 isn't coming to Wii U, if Nintendo fixes the relationship between them and EA than we would probably see BF4 on Wii U, and Dice and Crytek are owned by EA, so they can't give much support to Wii U if EA doesn't let them.
There's a big question here, people are saying the Wii U is underpowered compared to PS4/720, which it is, BUT does that mean the Wii U can't handle PS4/720 games? No, the Wii U can't handle them at the same output but that doesn't mean it will stop third party games from coming to Wii U, the Wii was WAY too underpowered to come to the Wii, the Wii U is a lot closer to PS4/720 than Wii was to PS3/360.
This doesn't contradict any of my statements. The Wii U is more capable than the 360/PS3, yet this 2 consoles have the Cryengine running. The engine can be scaled back to even mobile platforms.Edit: And like what jeffers posted, Crytek said/says Cry Engine 3 runs "beautifully on Wii U"
Best Wii U post I've read in ages.
Didn't you saw the Battlefield 4 Q&A?
Best Wii U post I've read in ages.That "7 year old hardware" argument is a bit slanted. For example, the Xbox 360 sold for a major loss out of the gate, about $125 for each $400 console. PS3 sold for $599. That already makes the "point" a little less genuine, compared to the $299 to $349 Wii U which is more or less sold at cost.
It also can't be ignored that Nintendo is choosing a different angle, with an extremely expensive controller. Replacements are $150. So the actual "box" is probably about $200 to $250. Isn't that what the 360 and PS3 base models go for these days, give or take? Chalk up the rest of the sticker price to the trimmings that come with the package. Hard drives, games, controllers, Kinects, gamepads, etc.
Is there similar outrage over the OUYA's power? Or is the fact that it's $99 and built for a different purpose somehow relevant there and not here? It's like a sports car owner scoffing at someone's 2013 Ford Focus. They're both car owners but with completely different priorities and budgets. Though like many who had a 360/Wii or PS3/Wii this gen, I'm sure several of us will end up owning more than one console this go 'round too.
Nintendo should target those indies and HARD, in anticipation for when Wii U's price hits that "sweet spot" that resonates with the casual crowd. I don't picture unique and affordable indie software making people rush out to buy a PS4. That crowd will value the top of the line, huge budget experiences. Wii U's biggest competition IMO will be the 360/PS3, which I don't think will die as quickly as some expect.
I could be wrong, but indies I think are Nintendo's best shot. It's a shame that they skimped out on the U's internal memory. I suppose they can upgrade that over time as affordability allows.
I figured I'd ask straight-out, so during the Q&A with Rein, I did. "Will UE4 run on the Wii U?"
"Hahaha no." Rein said, with expert comedic timing. The room erupted with laughter. As the laughs died down, Rein continued: "I mean, sorry, it's not really a correct answer. We're not… we have Unreal Engine 3 for the Wii U. Right? And Unreal Engine 3 is powering all kinds of amazing games, still lots of games are being made with Unreal Engine 3. We announced today about a new Unreal Engine 3 license. Unreal Engine 3 doesn't disappear because of Unreal Engine 4. But our goal for Unreal Engine 4 console-wise is next-gen consoles. That's really what our energies are focused on. If you want to make a Wii U game, we have Unreal Engine 3, and it's powering some of the best games on the Wii U already.
If you seriously haven't heard of this, you don't really follow WiiU threads and as such your notions of the system are probably preconceived. For reference, Crysis 3 didnt get a port due to lack of incentive, but because EA actively blocked its development.For someone like Crytek, a more feature rich Wii U would have been a strong incentive to port Crysis 3 just not because of sales but also for the reason that the game becamos a marketing tool for their engine.
Also it would be nice if you guys provide me an informative link about the fight between EA and NIntendo. This seems intereseting.
AGITΩ;55835248 said:If you build an audience in the system than essentially it would still give reason to develop games on the Wii U because its apparent easy of development and just upscale to other platforms. Majority of the arguments on Nintendo platforms is due to the only Audience on there only wanting Nintendo games, that's only true if they don't give a real effort to the machine and only let Nintendo shine on it anyway.
Also to reiterate, i would like to see an article regarding the EA and Nintendo fight please. Since i wasn't aware of that issue. And nothing is coming up it seems.
Finally, Iwata is aware of the fact that many people hold the belief that Wii U is underpowered, and feels they need to work on remedying such misunderstandings.
Even with the asumption that the Upad costs a 150? When the BOM is no where near that much. WHen comapared to other products in the market
I guess it would help relieve GAF from having the same conversations over and over again if the executives in this industry would stop having the same conversations over and over again.
Final Fantasy's primary target demographic is still males aged 15-35. That's not saying it doesn't have broader appeal, as does Kingdom Hearts. But they were just examples pulled off the top of my head. Gran Turismo, Tomb Raider, Metal Gear Solid, Tekken, Tony Hawk.There is a comparative difference between the PS1-era gamer and the dudebro gamer. I knew what people would call a dudebro gamer in college... He owned a PS2 and only played EA Sports games and GTA. Meanwhile, I find it hard to believe that Kingdom Hearts did not appeal to young children as it was a game based on Disney franchises. I also know that Final Fantasy back in the day appealed to women more. There is a marked difference between the audience for Final Fantasy and Kingdom Hearts and the audience for GTA and Halo.
This idea that becoming some sort of indie mecca, in absence of major third party publisher support, is going to spur recovery is frankly the most bizarre wishful thinking.
Interesting. You happend to know what's the rumor source. I find this really hard to believe btw, that Nintendo would have contemplated something like that type of partnership with EA in the first place. When EA is such an strong prescense across al platforms. Really hard to believe.EA was originally a major player for Wii U, even having a significant presence at Nintendo's 2012 E3 conference. The rumor is that Nintendo's eShop was originally going to be an Origin platform but the deal fell through and EA's been making Nintendo pay ever since.
Is not that hard to do Glass, is just common sense. There are products, ones that are not even subsidized, that feature a lot of more hardware than what the Upad contains and the cost does not reach 150 dollars. Just a quick Amazon search by price would be enough.Isn't that the rumored replacement fee? Even so, my post assumed a range of $100-$150 (the basic U's price with $100 subtracted is $200). So I think that's covered. But I wouldn't mind if you linked me an accurate cost analysis of the gamepad, anyway.
"Please understand" is dangerously aproaching an Andrew Ryan subconsious type trigger phrase. Is like a summon call from Iwata for the partisans to defend the cause XD"Understand, understand..."the concept of love! UGH!
Comparing the Wii U to the PC platform is one of the biggest stretches you could make.It seemed to work for PC gaming. Its also only one part of a whole strategy that Nintendo's trying to do. They're literally casting the widest net of options to them to try and have something stick. It may or may not work out, but lets not blame them for trying something.
Isn't that the rumored replacement fee? Even so, my post assumed a range of $100-$150 (the basic U's price with $100 subtracted is $200). So I think that's covered. But I wouldn't mind if you linked me an accurate cost analysis of the gamepad, anyway.
The industry that has seen hundreds of studios and one major publisher collapse within the last 18 months. Perhaps its not just Nintendo that needs to reevaluate how they do business. When a game selling 3milllion is considered a failure, there's a much bigger problem that needs to be discussed.
Interesting. You happend to know what's the rumor source. I've find this really hard to believe btw, that Nintendo would have contemplated something like that in the first place.
The system is overprice because nobody is buying it. Either Nintendo needs to somehow make the system worth $300 for consumers, or they should drop it down to $200, which is the price consumers normally expect of Nintendo hardware.