-Pyromaniac-
Member
I hope whoever thought of the slider pad on 3DS got fired (jk) and was nowhere to be seen when designing the Wii-U, because that could be a disaster.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Wii U Speculation Thread of Brains Beware: Wii U Re-Unveiling At E3 2012
- Thread starter bgassassin
- Start date
- Status
Would you have preferred a PSP-style nub?
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
The pad is great for a clamshell design like the 3DS (better than shitty alternatives, anyway). I agree it's a bad move for the WiiU though, since the tablet is already far too big to fit in your pocket, and doesn't need to fold.
How much?, seriously lets bet..
PS3 came out in 2006 with significantly lower specs than WiiU will have and it cost $600-700, yet you're betting that WiiU could have been made in 2006 for slightly more than $349, seriously give me free money!
I mean in 2006 the best PC GPU's were 320 SPU R600 based GPU's, and that was a highend PC GPU.
See you say you aren't trolling but this post is bizarre.
Seriously, I believe you aren't trying to troll. But the fact is saying that WiiU's performance would have been possible in 2006 for $349 (even without the controller and even assuming your 50% more powerful assumption is correct) is just wrong, totally wrong. PS3 was a hot console that cost $650-$700 to make, now add 50%..
Also WiiU won't only be 50% more powerful, not a chance.
I had stated earlier the example only served to illustrate my expectations and doesn't really matter. My expectations are say, 50% more powerful. What exactly did the PS3 spend on to make such an expensive device? Cell had a huge R&D budget. From what I can gather the 360's CPU is pretty comparable without shelling out the same dough. Blu-Ray. Very expensive early on. If they had chosen DVD, it would not have affected the raw power of the machine and saved a bunch of cash. A contract with Nvidia. There is a reason MS did not use them again with the 360 and why they won't appear in a next-gen console.
So if Nintendo chose a reasonable CPU (perhaps another tri-core Cell spin off like 360), a GPU from AMD with a similar power output to Xenos but a year later (since it would be '06) and a gig of unified memory at the same price as the PS3...they could have had something as powerful as what I expect from the Wii U so I do not get hyped. Take it or leave it. Don't like what I say, don't care.
-Pyromaniac-
Member
actually yes. Problem with the slide pad is that it has literally ZERO grip. You simply cannot use it for an extended period of time. It's just uncomfortable, much like the 3DS altogether, but that's another story.
edit: I need to find someone in NA that sells these:
that's how bad it is. Even though I'd be afraid to use it fearing the top screen might touch it when closed.
I don't think the Wii U controller should have them but I disagree with them being a pain. I thought they would be but I finally got my hands on a 3DS and played mario for a few hours and had no problems with the circle pad.
StreetsAhead
Member
Sticks would probably cause too much stretching with such a relatively large controller, especially for people with small hands.
Circle pads are a good choice. I just wish they were clickable but I suppose the touch screen compensates for that.
Maybe it's because I have big hands or something. 3DS gives me some problems after an hour of play... never had this problem with the DS/Lite/XL.
The Wii U controller looks much more comfortable to hold, but still, circle pads? There is absolutely no reason for that.
I think if they were elevated analogs you'd most definitely get hand cramps because of how big the controller is.
Aizu_Itsuko
Member
In consoles people make their games as good looking as possible given the budget.
It's only on the PC side where developers choose to make their games less detailed, in most cases because you have to develop your game for the lowest common denominator (the average mass market PC instead of a high-end gaming PC for example).
My big hope for next gen is a focus on great lighting. That Zelda demo had me drooling. So if Retro has their hands on it...what style should they go for?
I really hope its nothing like the demo or anything that came before. Let EAD work on a cartoony Zelda game, I'll eat it up. I want Retro to do something a little grittier, but still...stylish. I'm thinking like a classic '80's movie like Labyrinth, Never Ending Story, or Dark Crystal, maybe some Tim Burton. When I think about it...duuuuuuude.
I really hope its nothing like the demo or anything that came before. Let EAD work on a cartoony Zelda game, I'll eat it up. I want Retro to do something a little grittier, but still...stylish. I'm thinking like a classic '80's movie like Labyrinth, Never Ending Story, or Dark Crystal, maybe some Tim Burton. When I think about it...duuuuuuude.
Error Macro
Member
Another thing I'm worried about is Nintendo cheaping out and really cutting corners with the controller. I can't believe how much of a downgrade the analog stick on the Wii's Nunchuk is compared to the GameCube's near-perfect stick. The Wii's analog feels like some cheap Chinese ripoff--really shocked that Nintendo would put something out like that, they've always been known for their build quality.
Wouldn't that only be a factor due to how thick the controller is? And it doesn't look any thicker than a standard controller; quite the contrary.
Naked Prime
Member
Considering how most Japanese developers dropped the ball this generation (in terms of visuals) I wonder how the Wii U might fit next go round, especially taking into account Naughty Dogs recent comment about the upcoming generation of hardware. Even with middleware solution Japanese devs still seemed to come up short the past several years. It seems that they are seemingly getting a grip on creating comepelling HD visuals, but might a huge jump set them back right back to square one? Or could they flourish on the Wii U, as it maybe a good balance of power to cater to their talents?
Error Macro
Member
Yes! We could design an official NeoGAF Wii U controller model and send it to NCL somehow. Who knows, it might have some minor influence...
StreetsAhead
Member
Not sure if serious...?
Hmm, lets see what I could draw up...
:lol
It looks so comfortable. How'd you come up with such a design?
Error Macro
Member
14% serious
Hmm, lets see what I could draw up...
Perfect!
Send it to miyamoto@nintendo.co.jp
CC to iwata@nintendo.co.jp
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
*tips hat*
Believe it or not, but I'm not even a Nintendo fanboy. The names Mario and Zelda meant nothing to me until not long ago. I was draw to nintendo platforms in 2003 by one 3rd party game that got universal rejection back then (now it's somewhat iconic, heh) and one non-japanese 1st-party experiment of dubious prospects : )
herzogzwei1989
Banned
keep in mind that the RV770 is 4-5 times more powerful than PS3'RSX and 360'Xenos.
Even if we only get double the performance of 360/PS3 with 1 GB RAM I'll be reasonably content.
Even if we only get double the performance of 360/PS3 with 1 GB RAM I'll be reasonably content.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
If they changed the GC controller to have the C-Stick be just a yellow version of the Left Analogue Stick, enlarged the D-Pad and gave a second Z button on the left, it would be the best controller ever. So dicking comfortable.
ShockingAlberto
Member
Wait for the revision with two analog sticks.
MrBelmontvedere
Member
never underestimate how flipping cheap Nintendo is. 2X the performance of current consoles sounds like the upper boundary for Wii U. ~1.2X is what I personally expect (would love to be proven wrong however).
One thing, you have to see that have a system that is 2x over another doesn't mean that you will see or have a game "two times better" (in resolution, framerate, etc, etc) ... the use of the resources to make a thing look/run two times better is more than a 2x gap.
Only to clarify, althought I think most of you know it.
Only to clarify, althought I think most of you know it.
May I ask where you got the measly 1.2x from? Are you thinking that Wii U, release in 2012, will only be 20% more powerful than tech released in 2005/6 and if so, why do you think that? Everything we're hearing would seem to indicated otherwise I thought.
Yes, and which one of the '2x' is the Wii U falling into? 2x more powerful or '2x better'?
TheExplodingHead
Banned
Yeah I think anyone expecting a majority of Wii U games (even ports) to run any higher than 720p 30fps is living in a pipe dream. The most I can see relative to port releases at launch, are more stable framerates and native 720p. I.E. Dark Souls theoretically might be a locked 30fps if a launch title, but nothing else. Although later in it's lifespan I could see Wii U games easily eclipsing what we have now by a small margin.
Another thing that I'll say again is the gap between both performance cost of the Upad and time implementing, prototyping, polish of those features in Wii U games as opposed to what we have today on HD consoles. That might just be the determining factor in how dev's allocate their time and resources from a practical dev cycle standpoint.
Yes, and which one of the '2x' is the Wii U falling into? 2x more powerful or '2x better'?
The number is simply an example, not actual facts.
I mean that to see a big change over actual games, you need more than 2-3 times the power of ps360.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Take a GPU from 2009 with heavy modifications, a gig to a gig and a half of some RAM, a closed system dev environment, and you've got a recipe for games a lot prettier than the current gen top end. My version of a lot doesn't seem to align with those of others. MS and Sony are probably going to be in the "Jesus Tits!" arena, though time will tell.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
No doubt it could, but I also try to align my speculations with Nintendo's recent history of tech choices too (as sad as that may be). Also aligned with reasonable costs. The potential is certainly there to blow away the PS3/360 spec-wise, but I think Nintendo is competing with current "standards" of visuals on consoles and their own products' capability. After all that's what happened with the 3DS, nothing more nothing less. They seem to be following the same mentality with the Wii U based on everything we know. So I think to expect anything but a 720p 30fps bottom line is being a little presumptuous. I certainly hope, but I expect it to be a souped up version of what PS3/360 offer now.
And that also brings us to the question of how easy will the Upad be to develop for, will dev resources and time be better spent prototyping and polishing them (especially at launch), and what if any OS and Upad technical tasks performance costs there will be. With such a central selling point Nintendo has to go all in on the Upad and if I had to bet there will be HUGE resources both technical and time and money spent on it's implementations...much to our chagrin throughout the gen probably.
Two times the performance certainly isn't the upper limit, in fact its the lower limit.
Nothing we know about the controller suggests it would require huge resources. Its a relatively low res screen, and streaming is hardly a complex task.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
Performance costs in terms of how the OS/features could be theoretically incorporated into the screen seamlessly, is not a freebie performance-wise. The question of how small of a cost and what if any features are a mandatory incorporation in the screen is my question. Even the bottom line functions of inventory, "extending the TV screen" and creating a sort of window into the game, is not free performance-wise...not to mention while also still supporting those OS/features seamlessly at the same time....without any sort of lag...without any sort of technical hiccups...is not free performance-wise.
And it's certainly not free from a development resources perspective, which is the much bigger issue. No matter how low of a cost the Upad will be "performance wise" it definitely won't be easy or cheap to perfect on the UI and the gameplay front. And will probably take a year or two of games to really figure out what works and where. That extra obligatory cost of finding/creating/implementing places to use the screen effectively is not a easy or cheap development cost, is my point if dev's choose to use it. Nintendo first-party will be a huge pusher of the idea and we have to expect the experimentation and ideas will come at the cost of solely dedicating dev time to just gameplay and graphics. There is now an extra idea, cost and think tank when considering any serious product on the Wii U, just like it was for the Wiimote and we see how third-parties embraced that...
gingerbeardman
Member
Ha! Back to school for you.
Castor Krieg
Banned
It is the upper limit. Nintendo will carefuly monitor how much they can get away with i.e. how low they can go with production cost, when they base WiiU on a gimmick (touch screen!). It's always about profitability for Nintendo, and huge profitability. They will not go for anything too advanced.
Also, shipping for anything more than 299$ will be a suicide, so you need to factor that in as well.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
They don't need to go for anything too advanced to trump your upper limit.
You can expect a $300+ pricetag.
Why, you dont think Nintendo fans will support a $399 console like Microsoft or Sony fans?
Or do you think more than 299 is suicide for all console makers?
Yes. Considering how important controls are for Nintendo, they dont do anything without reason. They probably weighed the pros and cons and this was the best solution.
Freezie KO
Banned
Nintendo is not cheap, Nintendo spends plenty in R&D that has resulted in innovations which has kept the game industry moving forward. Their games, especially their top games are well designed and highly polished. Their hardware tend to be well built.
They might not spend the money in areas that you are interested in, or they might not sell their products for a loss, but that has nothing to do with being cheap. On the contrary, I think they are trying their best to create a sustainable industry for video games.
You can't just barge into a thread that has actual evidence that 2x is the lower bound of the jump we're seeing, based on the sole reason Nintendo has made one single console that was behind the technology curve.
Nintendo is neither incompetent (at least not in the R&D department) or cheap.
Refreshment.01
Member
Adding to that, Sony will have similar features to the WiiU with the Vita + PS3 interaction before Nintendo even releases the console.
Kind of a missed oportunity since Nintendo made a good push to the GBA + GC interaction but went cold with the idea in the Wii + NDS generation where it made most sense.
This is something i've been waiting for years. Never understood why manufactures made the thumbsticks so elevated since it stresses the thumb. It's not like they couldn't get the base deeper into the controller to have less elevation. As long as the circle pads are precise i think is a good design choice, even the new face buttons layout. Although my favorite is still the GameCube one, the most logical layout in years.
Like you already do with the beetle in Skyward sword? These are the types of ideas that sound good but don't justify investing heavily in this tablet controller.
They do invest a lot in R&D, but Nintendo is cheap.
Take a look at the GC controller. They used the same GBA cross pad in a GC controller sacrificing confort. Devs told them to please put 2 shoulder buttons there so among other things they could have an easy time making ports, Nintendo put the half assed Z button. They don't even use depressible thumbsticks, when the input method is rally practical.
Let's not argue the Wii, the thing doesn't even have an ethernet port. Or the prices of their digital content.
I do understand these things save cents that when multiplied by millions save a significant amount of money but that doesn't make then any less cheap in comparison to other companies.
Ha! Back to school for you.
You've either misunderstood me by taking my comment out of context or you need to take your own advice. Of course streaming can be considered a complex task. What I was saying is its not complex to the point where its going to sap a huge amount of resources away from a 3 to 4 core Power7 based CPU. Not forgetting the likelyhood of a separate CPU in there to handle that kind of thing (aka Starlet).
That has more to do with their take on building a contoller (they probably wanted to keep it simple or something) rather than cheapness... It's not a very strong example anyway.
Okay. You are right that Nintendo is 'cheap' compared to their competitors in that way. What you're talking about is cheapness in accessories and accessory options, which is indeed something Nintendo could but won't improve on. That is something else than the cheapness MrBelmontvedere and me were talking about, who thought Nintendo would cut down on processing power out of sheer cheapness.
No, It isn't..
Stop going on about gimmicks and profits for a moment and consider what we're already hearing about the dev kits. Then consider what kind of technology it would take to be more than twice as powerful as current gen consoles, that doesn't take advanced technology.
At the moment your opinion seems to be based on nothing more than assumptions about Nintendos aims rather than any knowledge of the hardware we're likely to see.
Nicktendo86
Member
A small point but, if I remember rightly, the d-pads are actually different. I think the GBA one was actually bigger...
- Status