Support NeoGAF

[TheNatural]

What? Why don't those systems count? Saturn came out like two weeks before PS1.

Because they barely lasted two years? Even if you want to include them, obviously the power of the system meant nothing to why SEGA crashed and burned out of the console business.

As far as a prolonged console war goes where consoles last their full planned life cycle, power hasn't mattered the past three generations.

 

[Triple U]

Depends on how you define a generation then. The Wii came out the same year as the PS3 and a year after 360, correct? Most people would say that puts it in the same console generation as the PS3 and 360.

PS1 launched less than 20 days after Saturn...

 

[StuBurns]

Because they barely lasted two years? Even if you want to include them, obviously the power of the system meant nothing to why SEGA crashed and burned out of the console business.

As far as a prolonged console war goes where consoles last their full planned life cycle, power hasn't mattered the past three generations.

That's utterly moronic. If discussing the success of systems, you can't ignore the least successful to prove your point.

 

[gofreak]

I definitely agree that "first place" does not automatically equate to "did everything right and understands the market perfectly." But I think we have considerable additional evidence to suggest that Nintendo is, in fact, right in this regard.

If the Wii were the only graphically/technically weak platform to do well recently, it may be an outlier. Instead, we also have the DS (obviously), early gen iPhones, Android phones, and Facebook games, all platforms which rely on or which exclusively provided games with inferior graphical and technical capabilities -- and all of which, save Android, are individually more popular than either the PS3 or 360.

This certainly suggests that graphics/presentation/superficial concerns really aren't very significant for most people.

Mobile is a pretty different context. Other factors come to the fore.

But overall, what's important in each area is that you present a type of entertainment the market values.

Nintendo was and is correct that you can create popular entertainment without high specification hardware - without 'graphics/presentation/superficial concerns' (although I would argue the potential effect of higher specification platforms on content goes beyond the superficial).

However it doesn't prove the market doesn't care about 'high specification' entertainment. In the home console market, that segment remains the more popular one. Don't let the fact it's split two or three ways from a platform POV fool you about how the market values that kind of entertainment.

Nintendo is simply choosing not to compete for that segment, not to offer that kind of entertainment, which is fine. Their systems need to rely on something else to drive new entertainment experiences. Wii did this very well. We'll see if Wii-U does.

 

[Het_Nkik]

Counting Saturn and Dreamcast is bizarre world since SEGA was off in their own half generation tangent. Between the real console wars, the past three generation the weakest system has won.

Saturn released the same year as the PlayStation and was coming off a battle where it faired well against fucking Nintendo. How could you not count Sega?

Regardless, I'm not entirely sure you can say the Saturn was flat out weaker than the PlayStation. There are several games that ran a hell of a lot better on Saturn than PlayStation. Both consoles had their strengths.

 

[PdotMichael]

The context of the post was this was the first time the weakest has "won."

It wasn't. PS2 was the least powerful and PS1 was less powerful than the N64.

Counting Saturn and Dreamcast is bizarre world since SEGA was off in their own half generation tangent. Between the real console wars, the past three generation the weakest system has won.

well... it's nice to believe in an universal rule that the weakest console will win (even with the "Sega doesn't count" exception).

but the reason for the success of Wii, PS2 and PS1 are different.

Wii - cheapest console, motion controller
PS2 - big hype (technolgy monster), dvd player, superior exclusive games
PS1 - cheaper than Saturn and N64, easy to develop for it, first real 3d console for the mainstream target group, great software support because of Nintendo's bad relationship with pretty much all software developers.

 

[Turok_TTZ]

the specs are disappointing (cpu) but if there is gonna be a potential fire emblem u on this console then there can be no question. day 1 ._.

 

[Mit-]

Depends on how you define a generation then. The Wii came out the same year as the PS3 and a year after 360, correct? Most people would say that puts it in the same console generation as the PS3 and 360.

Although I always forget the Dreamcast isn't much older than the PS2. Even still, the Dreamcast is a $200 piece of technology from late 1998, and the PS2 is a $300 piece of technology from early 2000. Its hardware was at a level that games could not be easily ported from PS2 to Dreamcast, AND the Dreamcast was almost dead by the time the PS2 even came out. I'd say Dreamcast definitely deserves its "half" or "between generations" title, as opposed to the Wii. The Wii was very much Nintendo's console designed to compete in this current generation of gaming.

PS1 launched less than 20 days after Saturn...

-- I was not trying to defend the Saturn part of all that >.>

 

[TheNatural]

That's utterly moronic. If discussing the success of systems, you can't ignore the least successful to prove your point.

So a year or two of a failing company crashing out of the console business and not even completing a console life cycle is relevant to this discussion?

Since we're going down this route, why not include 3D0, Jaguar, Neo Geo, CD-i, among others then?

PS1 and N64 was the console war, and PS2, Xbox, and Gamecube was the following console war for most of each generation's life cycle, while SEGA was an irrelevant distant side system.

Consumers made their decision based on these choices, so I would say that's more important than bringing up which fringe consoles technically has more or less power just to argue semantics.

 

[Glorified G]

That's utterly moronic. If discussing the success of systems, you can't ignore the least successful to prove your point.

You can if you want your flawed argument to have any merit.

 

[Conor 419]

Maybe I should have said the cheapest? (Would that have worked?)

 

[Barack Lesnar]

If the Wii were the only graphically/technically weak platform to do well recently, it may be an outlier. Instead, we also have the DS (obviously), early gen iPhones, Android phones, and Facebook games, all platforms which rely on or which exclusively provided games with inferior graphical and technical capabilities -- and all of which, save Android, are individually more popular than either the PS3 or 360.

There are factors to consider here before saying something like iPhone is more popular than either the PS3 or 360. In the context of this discussion (gaming) iPhone is not more popular. Look at game sales, revenue, time spent gaming, which are all less than 360/PS3.

 

[DeuceGamer]

From what I've read this is pretty much what was expected, right? I don't understand all the "disapointment" if you followed the Wii U at all.

This will be a large jump over the Wii, and possibly a small jump over the PS360, which will be nice for playing Nintendo's games and Wii U exclusives. For those that planned on getting a second console, or PC gaming, this should be no problem.

For me absolutely nothing changes. I'll be looking to get a Wii U but will also be looking to get Nextbox or PS4.

 

[Opiate]

Mobile is a pretty different context. Other factors come to the fore.

But overall, what's important in each area is that you present a type of entertainment the market values.

Nintendo was and is correct that you can create popular entertainment without high specification hardware - without 'graphics/presentation/superficial concerns' (although I would argue the potential effect of higher specification platforms on content goes beyond the superficial).

However it doesn't prove the market doesn't care about 'high specification' entertainment. In the home console market, that segment remains the more popular one. Don't let the fact it's split two or three ways from a platform POV fool you about how the market values that kind of entertainment.

Nintendo is simply choosing not to compete for that segment, not to offer that kind of entertainment, which is fine. Their systems need to rely on something else to drive new entertainment experiences. Wii did this very well. We'll see if Wii-U does.

Right, "core" gamers, as I said. They are an increasingly small segment of the market, but as I said, they exist.

I do think it's odd, however, that the supposed "elites" of the gaming world are the most concerned with appearances and superficialities. Imagine if, for example, it was the film buffs who cared about special effects, or the music critics who were wowed by bombastic presentation and high production values! It's an odd situation that's not mirrored in any of the other major media.

 

[StuBurns]

So a year or two of a failing company crashing out of the console business and not even completing a console life cycle is relevant to this discussion?

Since we're going down this route, why not include 3D0, Jaguar, Neo Geo, CD-i, among others then?

PS1 and N64 was the console war, and PS2, Xbox, and Gamecube was the following console war for most of each generation's life cycle, while SEGA was an irrelevant distant side system.

Consumers made their decision based on these choices, so I would say that's more important than bringing up which fringe consoles technically has more or less power just to argue semantics.

The Saturn sold much closer the N64, than the N64 did to the PS1. If anything, the Saturn versus the N64 was the 'war', Sony just owned the field they were thumb wrestling on.

 

[Glorified G]

Maybe I should have said the cheapest? (Would that have worked?)

Gamecube & Dreamcast were the cheapest systems last gen.

 

[2MF]

https://twitter.com/IBMWatson/status/78473693843562498

This post needs to be quoted. Either IBM is lying or this rumor's BS.

 

[Palette Swap]

While Nintendo has made a huge business case for the success of underpowered hardware, that statement " pretty much every single console generation that the weakest system has always came out on top" is as false as it is irrelevant to the case.
Mostly because before the Wii, there had never been a gen with so underpowered a hardware compared to the other consoles available at the time. There's no need to say "this has always been the case", it clearly hasn't but that doesn't make the current paradigm any less true.

 

[Bisnic]

This post needs to be quoted. Either IBM is lying or this rumor's BS.

What did he say? Twitter is blocked.

 

[Triple U]

Although I always forget the Dreamcast isn't much older than the PS2. Even still, the Dreamcast is a $200 piece of technology from late 1998, and the PS2 is a $300 piece of technology from early 2000. Its hardware was at a level that games could not be easily ported from PS2 to Dreamcast, AND the Dreamcast was almost dead by the time the PS2 even came out. I'd say Dreamcast definitely deserves its "half" or "between generations" title, as opposed to the Wii. The Wii was very much Nintendo's console designed to compete in this current generation of gaming.


-- I was not trying to defend the Saturn part of all that >.>

Its nothing against you, I just love discussion like this

Anyway, I definitely think dreamcast was meant to compete with the PS2. Everybody knew a successor was coming. And as far as the whole half-generation thing, PS2 was first announced at E3 about 4 months before dreamcast launched in NA. LOL Sony was really going at Sega back in the day...

Edit:

Heres a good article.

http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/february04/ps2timeline/index2.shtml

 

[Barack Lesnar]

What did he say? Twitter is blocked.

It's that quote from last year from IBMwatson twitter that says it's running on the same cpu

 

[Conor 419]

Gamecube & Dreamcast were the cheapest systems last gen.

Fair enough.

I'm not sure why I didn't consider Sega's systems, maybe I'm so used to the typical PS1/N64 and PS2/Xbox/GC formats which are usually brought up.

 

[TheNatural]

The Saturn sold much closer the N64, than the N64 did to the PS1. If anything, the Saturn versus the N64 was the 'war', Sony just owned the field they were thumb wrestling on.

Saturn sold 2 million in North America, N64 sold over 20 million, Saturn wasn't even an active player after the N64 launched - it was forgotten about and even Sega had moved on to Dreamcast talk.

 

[Bisnic]

It's that quote from last year from IBMwatson twitter that says it's running on the same cpu

Same CPU as what? The Wii?

 

[botty]

Does this mean the console could be fairly priced?

Spoiler

(cheap)

 

[TheGreyHulk]

CPU kills it. Just one horrible decision right there. "Enhanced" broadway cores that are 13 years old? C'mon man. The GPU is fine, but they dropped the ball on the CPU big time.

 

[2MF]

What did he say? Twitter is blocked.

 

[Duxxy3]

$250 wii u is damn near confirmed with these specs.

 

[MrCunningham]

What did he say? Twitter is blocked.

@TheDavidHansen #WiiU uses same #power7 chips.

8:49 AM - 8 Jun 11

The Twitter was dated from over a year ago. So it is possible that his post was based on older prototype hardware.

 

[gofreak]

Right, "core" gamers, as I said. They are an increasingly small segment of the market, but as I said, they exist.

I do think it's odd, however, that the supposed "elites" of the gaming world are the most concerned with appearances and superficialities. Imagine if, for example, it was the film buffs who cared about special effects, or the music critics who were wowed by bombastic presentation and high production values! It's an odd situation that's not mirrored in any of the other major media.

Well, I think 'high specification' as a philosophy 'won' this generation. Wii may have taken the honours as an individual platform, but more people bought into HD systems than bought into Wii. And that segment alone probably remained flat, if not saw growth, over the whole console industry last gen.

Of course it's more complicated. I'm sure many who bought HD systems didn't buy into them because they were simply powerful, but because they had content they wanted. But then we get into a question of which philosophy the content makers cared more for, and which attracted the content makers more...and that was a matter that certainly seems to have been influenced by 'power'.

So I think Nintendo is right, and finally proved, that you can build compelling entertainment without high spec. But people - more than a dwindling core, and more than Ninendo captured - did care for powerful game machines for whatever reason this gen. I do not know if Nintendo's choices about hardware reflect a reality that 'most people just don't care about power' as much as it reflects Nintendo's desire not to compete with others for the segment of the market that does appear to care. They feel, perhaps wisely, that they are better off taking a punt on things that might light in the market that they can more or less monopolise for a few years. If they fail, they probably won't fail any worse than Nintendo's previous attempts to compete directly with Sony/MS.

 

[StuBurns]

$250 wii u is damn near confirmed with these specs.

Is it conceivable, they could make a profit on $200 by the following November?

Cut to half the price of their competition for their second holiday, could be pretty brutal for the other two.

 

[2MF]

The Twitter was dated from over a year ago. So it is possible that his post was based on older prototype hardware.

True, but I would find it amazing if something as important the CPU was radically changing ~1 year before a console goes into mass production.

 

[Hoodbury]

$250 wii u is damn near confirmed with these specs.

I would love it if that were true, but don't forget the controller will be a bit more expensive than a normal console controller - driving the price up a bit. I'm still thinking $300.

 

[Bisnic]

i.minus.com is blocked too.

Yes my workplace sucks. GAF is literally all i have access for.

 

[GashPrex]

As far as I understood it goes from USB into ethernet, not reconvert the wireless signal.. I'm not sure it's confirmed for Wii U yet, but was a Wii feature.

oh ok - appreciate the info

 

[theangrypirate]

Weak CPU, no DirectX 11, weak RAM. Sounds pretty weak to me. Good luck Nin, I'm rooting for ya.

 

[Formless]

i.minus.com is blocked too.

Yes my workplace sucks. GAF is literally all i have access for.

"WiiU uses the same power7 chips"

 

[Zep]

this does. my computer from 6 years ago had 2 gb of ram standard. and this halves it.

i really gotta wonder how they're gonna plan on being able to push 2 screens with this hardware.

 

[MrCunningham]

Same CPU as what? The Wii?

No the same Power7 CPU that is found in the IBM Watson.

 

[RoadHazard]

Video Output: Supports 1080p, 1080i, 720p, 480p and 480i

This list is incomplete. Or maybe this is only for NA units? EU units should have 576i50 in addition to these output modes, for full Wii BC (or just for supporting all PAL SDTVs, which I imagine Nintendo will want to do).

 

[Enlil]

when Mario u hits we are all going to forget about specs and rub our penises on how nice it looks.

 

[Shahed]

All that matters to me is that i'll be playing Mario, Zelda, Metroid et al in HD visuals for the first time. I couldn't care if they look slightly better than current PS3/360 titles.

I'll get my PS4 for the next gen experience that the wii u cant give me.

Pretty much where I am. Ideally the Wii U would be stronger, but I was never gonna use it for multiplats. That's what PS4 or 720 are for. The Wii U is for Nintendo games and the odd Japanese exclusive

In fact having a cheaper console could be more useful. As much as I liked the GameCube and Wii, I don't want to spend too much on a platform that will be secondary to another

 

[EulaCapra]

Why are people surprised by these specs? Have you not been obsessively checking and subscribing to every Wii U Speculation Threads waiting for news and rumors to trickle then dissect like the rest of us?

 

[theangrypirate]

Is it conceivable, they could make a profit on $200 by the following November?

Cut to half the price of their competition for their second holiday, could be pretty brutal for the other two.

Yeah, except for the fact the other two will actually be far more powerful than current gen and wii U. People who have ps3 or 360 already have something comparable to this, albeit without 1st party Nintendo games.

 

[Dartastic]

1 gig of ram is the confirmed spec? Yikes. That's the only thing that I'm actually kinda worried about.

 

[hatchx]

Pretty much where I am. Ideally the Wii U would be stronger, but I was never gonna use it for multiplats. That's what PS4 or 720 are for. The Wii U is for Nintendo games and the odd Japanese exclusive

In fact having a cheaper console could be more useful. As much as I liked the GameCube and Wii, I don't want to spend too much on a platform that will be secondary to another

Yeah, but Nintendo didn't aim to be the secondary system with WiiU, and there will certainly be less odd Japanese exclusives next generation if the 3DS situation is any indication.

I think Nintendo's best bet is to play off of the gamepad features and try to win the digital war by pimping out the eshop. They may win by default if the 720/PS4 slip into 2014.

 

[BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO]

Someone translate this into DBZ levels of power plz

Ps3/360- SSJ 1 Goku
Wii U- SSJ 2 Teen Gohan
720/PS4- Probably around SSJ 4 Gogeta level

If the Wii U was a Mighty Morphin' Power Ranger, which would it be?

The pink one

 

[z0m3le]

1 gig of ram is the confirmed spec? Yikes. That's the only thing that I'm actually kinda worried about.

this is a rumor, in a couple months we will know how much ram is in it.

 

[Matt]

1 gig of ram is the confirmed spec? Yikes. That's the only thing that I'm actually kinda worried about.

Well it has more then 1 gig, but the rest is for the system OS and other function. So, it's not great, but it's more then twice what the 360 and PS3 have because of that fact.

 

[glimmerman]

So, basically the same spec as my galaxy s3.

No thanks, I'll wait for a bit.