NowGamer: Wii U's limited technology might lead to Nintendo's new console having a shorter lifespan when the Xbox 720 and PS4 arrive.
oooooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhh dear.
It will soon just be about the exclusives....
If u read the original source it clearly says they took an early look at the wiiu remember when it wasnt quite where it was now with early dev kits thats when the individual that said this formed his opinion and this is meant to mean what exactly Hmmmmmmmm the truth is the wiiu cpu is about 2 times the power of 360 ect but runs at slightly less speed the gpgpu is like 5x or more the power of 360 so there it is.
Seems this is not the only developer saying this. I wonder if Nintendo even listens to feedback from these developers when designing consoles. I mean seriously. Their next gen is Sony/MS current gen. After playing the DMC demo, I clearly see that these current consoles have tons of life still. Seeing the lineup of games in 2013, I really don't see a need for a new console next year. Would be a shame to bring out Last of Us, God of War 4, Gears 4, BF 4, Last Guardian, Watch Dog, Beyond Two Souls, Tomb Raider, Metal Gear:GZ/Rising, GTA 5, Bioshock Inf, Crysis 3, SC:Blacklist, Dead Space 3, and Injustice just so you can shell out another $400 for a new console. To me, 2013 is a bad year for a new console launch.
Wrong! A new console will be able to play all of your stated 2013 games at true 1080p with 60fps, plus better AI. I need the PS4 now!
@Rex 1080p at 60fps? Don't get your hopes up that high. I expect something more like ~1080p 30fps.
Is this a surprise to anyone?
It's the 2nd major dev in the space of 48 hours to comment on Ninty's lack of foresight &/or budget scrimping when it came to futureproofing the Wii U hardware... Come'on Nintendo, you have billions to splash about on R&D; expending a little bit more on a decent CPU could potentially have increased the shelf-life of your console, but no, instead you opted to save pennys at launch & jeopardize 3rd party support in the long-run.
@Jony Right, Therefor makes Nintendo's console outdated from a technical point of view. Unless Nintendo can pull off some amazing things with its U Pad, deliver AAA first party software. As well as obtaining AAA third party software that utilizes the U Pad in all the right ways that would make the consumer think twice about buying the AAA title on PS360. Then Nintendo won't be going very far come next year. But I will stay positive, the thing just came out. And I'm sure the Wii U will have great moments come next year. But, they have exactly a year from now to prove that, assuming next gen will arrive a year from now. Clock is ticking Nintendo.
Iwata is a damned fool. He's ruined Nintendo. Yeah, the Wii sold like hotcakes, but the whole gimmick of motion controls is what sold it (an idea that was not Iwata's). Iwata became Nintendo's president during the GameCube years, which coincidentally began the downfall of Nintendo. It can sell a billion systems, but 3rd party's still wont develop NEW games (just ports of old) because Nintendo never has any long term vision for it's products. I mean, look at 3ds, it doesnt even have any worthwhile games announced for 2013, except for Atlus's Shin Megami Tensei 4 game in japan.
These criticism by devs helped me decide on skipping the Wii U and spend my money on a powerful next-gen gaming PC.
Believe me when I say it's not 3rd party support that really doesn't drives a console. It's really only first party support. Ps3 usually get the short end when it comes to multiplatform games but it's first party games are killers. People dismissed Wii as Gamecube 2.5 w/motion control (gimmick). But Nintendo is very innovative and tends to think outside the box the most out of all the big 3. I think people are jumping the gun like they did on the Wii. People buy consoles for their exclusives, not their multiplats. Nintendo gave us Scribblenauts, Paper Mario, resurrected 2d side scrollers. Another thing is Nintendo is one of the few companies in Japan still making profits.
That goes without saying. Nintendo consoles typically are a 4 year cycle system. Sony and Microsoft (with their higher end technology) are more of a 6+ year system. So there is nothing to debate here. The only problem for consumers is, what will be the initial price of the consoles (PS4/Xbox720) when it comes to market. I personally expect an average price of $500-$600. That will be a serious problem. History already tells us it will... one just has to look back at the PS3 launch.
prices go down but specs don't go up!
Well said sir
It was only this past generation that nintendo had a limited console (wii). The snes was more powerful then the genesis, the n64 was more powerful then ps1 and sega saturn, the gamecube was more powerful then ps2 and equal to original xbox in power. Come on bro.
The SNES was limited by its crappy CPU. (Lag is noticeable in lots of SNES games and Genesis has noticably faster and more "active" games, e.g more going on at the screen at once.) N64 used cartridges which made it a lot more limited than the PS1 & Saturn when it came to game size and for this it suffered a lot. The Gamecube again had the problem of low storage space, but not as bad as the N64. Nintendo always seems to do something to mess up an otherwise good console.
the lag in the early snes games was noticeable. later releases dont show it. Snes did have some advantages in that there was a co processor for mode7 and they had a superior sound chip (thanks sony). Still, the genesis was able to hold its own with a limited color pallet. The old days of carts offered more flexibility than today in that they could add enhancements to the carts. What we get now are incomplete releases that we expect to be fixed with dlc and patches. That last part is being general not specific so no need for anyone to get in a twist.
@skull based on what you said, it most certainly comes down to the dev, as far as system capability goes. look at games like donkey kong(SNES), Turok 2(n64), and metroid prime(gcube) - all those games stomped on the competition, despite the systems "short comings".
The next consoles will not be $600 this time as that would really make the WiiU tempting in 2013 and Ms and Sony wont allow that. Also Nintendo has let us down once again it will be like this gen where the WiiU gets the cut down ports from 3rd party devs, only Nintendo's first party titles will save the WiiU.
Okay, we all know The PS4 and 720 are going to have more power. They are also going to cost allot more, $499 for a basic PS3 on release. So the Wii U has I would guess overall more power at least 50% more power OVERALL than current gen systems considering the clock speed being lower, but CPU/GPU/ having newer tech and the added RAM helps. So with that much more power, I look at games like Assassins Creed 3/Batman/BOPS and think, well they are not even using the power of the Wii U yet, and how much better do I need my games to look. The Wii U is certainly capable of putting out some great looking games. So if gamers say Graphics don't matter that much what is the problem? Gearbox says. http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... UBISOFT says this. http://www.vg247.com/2012/1... Crytek says this. http://www.escapistmagazine... So with all of these developers saying all this great stuff about Wii U, Unless the system does not sell Why not make great games for it...It has the power to do more than current gen games and 720 and PS4 are at least a year away. I for one Will be enjoying my Wii U for years to come and get the Nextbox and PS4 when they come down in price. It is not like the Wii U games are going to look or play badly.
to honest i don't even expect the rest of gen to look much better then this gen u. what i am expecting most next gen is a even more focus on multimedia then what we already got. also focus on things that can give something on one console that you can't get on the other for xbox such as kinect and smart glass, for playstation cross support for vita and for nintendo a focus on making better gameplay experience with the gamepad.
People act like just because the Wii U only has around (and I am guessing) 50% more power than the PS3 that the games are going to suck. If the Wii U has just that much more power it is going to have some very good looking games. Now with that said. Nintendo is going to have Cell phone aps for Wii U and DS support as well. Nintendo has been connecting gameboys for more than 10 years. I am not sure how the Cell phone Aps will work, but the Wii U has a very capable online system now. I am sure they will find great ways to integrate the tech. The games already look great and I am sure there are better to come. Its taken 7 years for the games to look this good on current gen systems for what Wii U has done on day one, and the developers are just getting used to the hardware.
@1upgamer99 that's what i have been saying like compare cod 2 to halo 4 or resistance to the last of us i bet next E3 a new zelda or retro's wii u game will blow people away
@1upgamer99 Everyone knows the wii U will push out great visuals and 1st party titles will look insane, but its it brings into doubt 3rd party support, when they begin using ps4/720 as their main platform. Of course it depends on the graphical leap those systems bring.
well thats what everyone in assuming, but that will probably change when the wiiU has sold 10million + by the end of january and the nextbox and ps4 are not out for another 10 months and have an install base of 0. Just like all the developers that were hyping the VITA and now they are all making games on the 3ds and ignoring the VITA because its low install base.
Not really, only if people don't understand how things work. Games are made using engines. CryEngine3, Frostbite 2, and Unreal 4 and luminosity engine are the engines that will bring us probably the majority of the games we play the rest of the decade. The rest will be custom game engines of varying or competing quality. Well as you can already tell CryEngine3 and Frostbite 2 can play games on the 360/PS3, thus there really is no limitation on the Wii U from playing games on these engines. They just won't be able to scale up quite as far as the 720/PS4 will, which of course won't scale up nearly as far as the PC will (but of course it's a gap that starts medium and grows wider every year). Thus 3rd party support will be there, because the games can run the engines...which run the games. Really the only thing I can see as limiting on the Wii U, due to the popular, '# of characters' comments would be possibly not being able to have 256 vs 256 multiplayer FPS, and might need to be 64 vs 64 or 128 vs 128, or something along those lines. But then again, with Anvil and AnvilNext, their engine has no problems displaying hundreds or more of NPC's. They can do it on 360/PS3, and the Wii U. So we'll see.
499 with stats that are being rumored? 599 bare minimum and that's being generous.
how about $599 with no games and 1 controller. All next gen games will be $69.99 and the new live membership will be $39.99 per month. now that's a deal!
Clock speed doesn't make a CPU better than a lower clock speed one, a pentium can have a higher clock than the i7 but that doesn't make it better. Same with RAM, I would take 1 GB of DDR 3 at 1600mhz over 2GB of RAM with DDR 3 at 1333mhz. The Wii U will never be at it's full glory because of the slow CPU, meaning the Wii U indeed will have less life. And don't say "It will overheat less, more efficient", there are better CPU's that don't overheat and are efficient. But if the GPGPU is good enough it may save the Wii U from staying behind; if not we won't see a big improvement in graphics, the GPGPU won't last long if it's not good.
that cpu "speed" isnt as relative as it once was. Like your comparison of lets say a 3.2ghz single core vs a 2.3ghz dual core. The first thing people gravitate to is the number as it relates to speed. But why is it that the slower cpu is actually faster? Its because it can spread the load across the multiple cores. That much we can agree on. Sorry if my choice of cpu examples are not entirely correct but the idea is sound. What I see happening is this is the first run of what may end up being a trend for consoles to come. Meaning that as things get smaller is no reason to let the quality diminish as well. Ultimately what sony or MS and possibly nintendo may shoot for is a real multipurpose platform that serves as a console when connected to a tv as well as a portable when you disconnect it. There have been several tries at such a feat but all have failed because of one thing or another. Be it the price/performance ratio or the media type or even the physical size. Examples would be: turboexpress as a portable turbografx sega nomad as a portable genesis sony psp 2000/3000 and GO as all 3 could be connected to a tv to play the games on a bigger screen. Most notably, the GO could use a real controller. People are using tablets and phones in much the same way. Playing games on them but also being able to plug into a tv to play games or watch vids on a bigger screen. Companies are working to hit that small and convenient market and as such there are sacrifices that are being made to accommodate but that doesnt mean these sacrifices will perpetuate. Like you said, there are better cpu/gpus but at this point they havent been able to fully realize the dual purpose of what a combo console/portable can be. It's coming and nintendo could be the first but they certainly wont be the last.
You'd be stupid to take 1gb at 1600 vs 2gb at 1333. If you knew anything about ram speeds in real world then youd also know that 1333 to 1600 is about 5-15% improvement, which is even less needed since 1333 is good enough for hardcore gaming or anything other than intense editing/rendering. Also comparing pentium with icore series is a terrible example. They are too many generations apart. And cpu clocks do matter quite well since the architecture isnt that advanced in the WiiU. For example id rather take an overclocked i5 2500k over a stock i5 3750 simply because ivy bridge is at most 5-15% improvement in real world usage, and if you oc 2500k to 4.6/4.8 you can even surpass that difference between sandy and ivy bridge.
It's more than that. The power of an i7 is more than just it's # of core, as core for core it's more powerful at a lower clock speed than pentium IV. When you add in multiple cores, that's why you have a chip that is an order of magnitude faster. It's actually basically based off the pentium III and not netcode pentium IV. Also it's not 1 gb vs 2 gb. As you have densities, # of memory channels, timings, and latency. So you don't necessarily want density over latency. You don't necessarily want clock speed over timings. You want more channels of memory. Then you have to realize that versus the PC you have less things piping into the processor, and so positioning wise RAM bandwidth isn't the same on a console as it is on a PC. Right now we're just hearing of PC equivalents. Then you have the eDRAM, and how the GPGPU functions. So overall we don't know much. We don't know about how the devs are viewing it, and whether they're comments are more like, "we're not breaking our code processes up so it runs better on more threads", or if the heads even realize it. Supposedly the Wii U has 4 threads per core, which would be 12 if it's tricore or 16 if it's quadcore. We still haven't even been told what it is. We've still heard both, but no one has opened one up to CHECK. Which is actually really easy to see if it's opened up. Of anything once it's opened, that's the easiest to recognize. It may indeed be everything the devs are saying about power wise, it also may not be. It doesn't make or break me, I have an i7 920@ 4ghz, and a GTX 670. So it's not like I'm wishing because I'm screwed otherwise. Just bringing up variables that can indeed alter the outcome from the currently held viewpoint of what the Wii U is capable of.