Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Nintendo's New Console - Wii U

It's all about Aliens: Colonial Marines, with the motion sensor running on the Upad's screen, and the lights turned off....

It's a HD Wii DS, but hopefully there will be a lot more to it than than the majority of the terrible software on the DS and the Wii. I can see what Nintendo are aiming for and the potential of the console, I only hope that developers take advantage of the incredible hardware they're being given to play with.

:apple:
 
peskaa said:
That's just another example of how Nintendo utilise older technology rather than the newest cutting-edge stuff. Also borne out by the rumours indicating that the GPU will be at least 2, if not 3, generations off the pace (HD 4xxx, opposed to the 6xxx that is available now, and 7xxx by the time WiiU launches).

Ugh, I hate resistive screens.
Click to expand...

Just another example...

Go ahead, give us a few more examples about Nintendo's hardware history and how it was never cutting edge.
 
peskaa said:
If the WiiU is 50% 'faster', then I'd bet that every game can run at 720p, if not 1080p, although perhaps not looking any different to the PS3/360 games bar the higher native resolution.
Click to expand...

Heh, having recently gone from a low end mac/console gaming to high end PC gaming, there really isn't much difference bar a constant 60fps frame rate and higher res and all the things that entails (higher res textures, more precision DOF).

Hopefully all these reports about UE3, Cryengine etc doesn't just mean the WiiU is going to get a load of ports that barely use the systems advantages!
 
JackAxe said:
Just another example...

Go ahead, give us a few more examples about Nintendo's hardware history and how it was never cutting edge.
Click to expand...

Wii - basically a GameCube with updated control mechanism. Nobody can argue that it is a graphical powerhouse.

3DS - resistive touchscreen, not capacitive. Low resolution cameras for no reason. Graphics nowhere near as impressive as the PS Vita.

DSi/XL - low resolution cameras. Graphics definitely inferior to PSP.

I'd also note that I didn't say "never cutting edge" - Nintendo used to be pushing the boundaries with their hardware, but not in recent times. They stopped doing that after the flop that was the GameCube, and to some extent the N64.


Dagless said:
Heh, having recently gone from a low end mac/console gaming to high end PC gaming, there really isn't much difference bar a constant 60fps frame rate and higher res and all the things that entails (higher res textures, more precision DOF).!
Click to expand...

High resolution textures make all the difference, along with various lighting techniques etc. that require a lot of GPU grunt. My point was that jumping from 720p to 1080p native resolution, with all the art assets staying the same, won't actually look much different (if any). Keeping the frame rate above 30, or even 60, would be a bonus as well. However, I doubt that a 50% boost in power will allow for an increase in resolution, higher res textures/shadowing/AA and a boost in FPS to 60. Pick two of the three!
 
peskaa said:
Wii - basically a GameCube with updated control mechanism. Nobody can argue that it is a graphical powerhouse.

3DS - resistive touchscreen, not capacitive. Low resolution cameras for no reason. Graphics nowhere near as impressive as the PS Vita.

DSi/XL - low resolution cameras. Graphics definitely inferior to PSP.

I'd also note that I didn't say "never cutting edge" - Nintendo used to be pushing the boundaries with their hardware, but not in recent times. They stopped doing that after the flop that was the GameCube, and to some extent the N64.
Click to expand...

You need to do more research, don't rely on just the banter from kids on the internet.
 
With Nintendo it's more innovation than cutting-edge.

In this case it's the use of a small tablet as part of a controller.

I'm still interested in seeing how much this "innovation" is going to cost...
 
peskaa said:
Wii - basically a GameCube with updated control mechanism. Nobody can argue that it is a graphical powerhouse.
Click to expand...

You seem to think that cutting edge = graphics and processor power only. Cutting edge refers to tech in general

And the Wii was cutting edge when it came to controls. Which is why Sony and MS had to adopt it

3DS - resistive touchscreen, not capacitive. Low resolution cameras for no reason. Graphics nowhere near as impressive as the PS Vita.
Click to expand...

The 3D camera is crap quality, but the cameras serve the purpose of the device's AR, which is cutting edge. Compare the AR on the 3DS which is spot on accurate and responsive to the AR on an iphone, which is unusable stuttering crap. When it comes to AR, the 3DS is cutting edge

And they carried the AR over to the Wii U controller, which should make anyone who was impressed at the 3DS AR, excited.

Also using 3D is pretty cutting edge tech, don't you think? Between all consumer electronics devices including cameras and TV's, there are less than 10 on the market with a glasses free lenticular screen. The 3DS is one of them
 
JackAxe said:
You need to do more research, don't rely on just the banter from kids on the internet.
Click to expand...

Right. I can clearly see you backing up your points. Not.

gkarris said:
With Nintendo it's more innovation than cutting-edge.

In this case it's the use of a small tablet as part of a controller.

I'm still interested in seeing how much this "innovation" is going to cost...
Click to expand...

Totally agree, they do innovate, but rarely at the peak of technical ability these days - the 3DS screen being the only exception, but even then the rest of the 3DS is 'behind' in technical terms.

Liquorpuki said:
You seem to think that cutting edge = graphics and processor power only. Cutting edge refers to tech in general

And the Wii was cutting edge when it came to controls. Which is why Sony and MS had to adopt it

The 3D camera is crap quality, but the cameras serve the purpose of the device's AR, which is cutting edge. Compare the AR on the 3DS which is spot on accurate and responsive to the AR on an iphone, which is unusable stuttering crap. When it comes to AR, the 3DS is cutting edge

And they carried the AR over to the Wii U controller, which should make anyone who was impressed at the 3DS AR, excited.

Also using 3D is pretty cutting edge tech, don't you think? Between all consumer electronics devices including cameras and TV's, there are less than 10 on the market with a glasses free lenticular screen. The 3DS is one of them
Click to expand...

This discussion was about technical details of consoles, which includes graphics as a major component. Yes, Nintendo do new things with control systems, never said they didn't. However, my point is that their recent efforts have been solely about the controller(s), whilst being well behind in the processing power side of things.

AR is a software thing, and clearly Nintendo have done a better job of the software than an iPhone developer. However, they still could have put better cameras in, it wouldn't have harmed the AR system, and would have made the cameras useful for other things. Yet they stick with the cheapest, old technology solution.

Yes, use of the 3D screen is at the peak of technology - but it's harnessed to other components that are not. Sony's approach with the PS Vita however couples a whole bunch of high-tech solutions together - fastest possible CPU/GPU, OLED touchscreen, rear touch interface, 3G etc. but for basically the same price.
 
peskaa said:
Totally agree, they do innovate, but rarely at the peak of technical ability these days - the 3DS screen being the only exception, but even then the rest of the 3DS is 'behind' in technical terms.
Click to expand...

Depends on what technical details you value. Instead of competing with Sony and Microsoft on traditional tech like processor power and graphics, they'd rather introduce some new killer tech (3D, motion control, AR, etc) into the market that none of the other consoles have. They sacrifice graphics and processor speed to keep the same price point and make the new tech the selling feature.

Their strategy is a gamble but I like it. Mostly because it incorporates new things that the other two companies would never try because it's too far out there. Plus Nintendo hasn't bombed yet.

AR is a software thing, and clearly Nintendo have done a better job of the software than an iPhone developer. However, they still could have put better cameras in, it wouldn't have harmed the AR system, and would have made the cameras useful for other things. Yet they stick with the cheapest, old technology solution.
Click to expand...

AR is a combination of HW and SW. I wonder if they ran into technical problems implementing AR on top of higher res cameras because they were able to use higher resolution AR on the Wii U controller. Or maybe they didn't want to push the price point of the 3DS past $300. Just speculation

Yes, use of the 3D screen is at the peak of technology - but it's harnessed to other components that are not. Sony's approach with the PS Vita however couples a whole bunch of high-tech solutions together - fastest possible CPU/GPU, OLED touchscreen, rear touch interface, 3G etc. but for basically the same price.
Click to expand...

I could use the same logic and say Sony coupled a peak tech processor and graphics to an old technology screen. Depends on what bleeding edge tech you think is important.

Personally I appreciate both. I own a 3DS and I'll probably buy a Vita when it comes out. I also like the fact that when Nintendo introduces some new idea into the industry, it's already streamlined and usable. Which makes me think the Wii U will be something cool when it comes out. Which is why I bought NTDOY this week.
 
Liquorpuki said:
Depends on what technical details you value. Instead of competing with Sony and Microsoft on traditional tech like processor power and graphics, they'd rather introduce some new killer tech (3D, motion control, AR, etc) into the market that none of the other consoles have. They sacrifice graphics and processor speed to keep the same price point and make the new tech the selling feature.

Their strategy is a gamble but I like it. Mostly because it incorporates new things that the other two companies would never try because it's too far out there. Plus Nintendo hasn't bombed yet.
Click to expand...

Not disagreeing there, never was. Nintendo are currently bombing a bit - their stock price is way down on what it was, as the Wii has run out of steam and the 3DS is having lacklustre sales. Stock also dropped on WiiU announcement. Sure, it's not a total tank, but it's not all positive news.

That said, the WiiU clearly *is* trying to compete on some level with the PS3/360 now, by taking the jump into the HD resolutions.

Oh, and Sony did AR quite a while ago with EyePet, it just needs the add-on camera.

AR is a combination of HW and SW. I wonder if they ran into technical problems implementing AR on top of higher res cameras because they were able to use higher resolution AR on the Wii U controller. Or maybe they didn't want to push the price point of the 3DS past $300. Just speculation
Click to expand...

How is AR anything more than software? The only thing a higher resolution camera does is create more data. Yes, it could be price related, as Nintendo also always make a big profit off their hardware. In fact, I'm more than willing to bet that the reason Nintendo have never offered a decent camera is due to cost.

I could use the same logic and say Sony coupled a peak tech processor and graphics to an old technology screen. Depends on what bleeding edge tech you think is important.
Click to expand...

Sorry, how is the PSVita's OLED capacitive touchscreen old? OLED is still an emerging technology struggling to get out of the mobile phone market. If they'd slapped a bog-standard LCD in (like Nintendo), then yes, you have a valid point...but they didn't.

Personally I appreciate both. I own a 3DS and I'll probably buy a Vita when it comes out. I also like the fact that when Nintendo introduces some new idea into the industry, it's already streamlined and usable. Which makes me think the Wii U will be something cool when it comes out. Which is why I bought NTDOY this week.
Click to expand...

I also own multiple gaming platforms - the only one I don't own is a 3DS, as I sent mine back. Doesn't mean I think Nintendo are the best thing ever though, I was sorely disappointed in the long run by the Wii. I'm on the fence with the WiiU until there are more details (ie: closer to launch) and importantly, more information about games.
 
Liquorpuki said:
Personally I appreciate both. I own a 3DS and I'll probably buy a Vita when it comes out. I also like the fact that when Nintendo introduces some new idea into the industry, it's already streamlined and usable. Which makes me think the Wii U will be something cool when it comes out. Which is why I bought NTDOY this week.
Click to expand...

Not everyone appreciates 3D though, even if it is high tech. It's hard not to appreciate a high resolution OLED touchscreen because it excels at all of the qualities that people obviously already valued in screens.
 
The 3DS has lackluster sales because there really isn't a reason to have one yet. Particularly when the Library for the DS is just packed with quality games.

Once it gets some solid titles the 3DS sales will pick up
 
Nuck81 said:
The 3DS has lackluster sales because there really isn't a reason to have one yet. Particularly when the Library for the DS is just packed with quality games.

Once it gets some solid titles the 3DS sales will pick up
Click to expand...

I'm not paying $250 for a machine with marginally better graphics and a selling point I don't care about. It's that simple. Price needs to be about half and have a lot better games out.
 
Nuck81 said:
The 3DS has lackluster sales because there really isn't a reason to have one yet. Particularly when the Library for the DS is just packed with quality games.

Once it gets some solid titles the 3DS sales will pick up
Click to expand...

It has poor sales because it's really bloody expensive for what you get!
 
Nintendo's Satoru Iwata recently said in an interview that games enlisting more than one Wii U controller aren't being considered just yet -- although they are possible. Our very own Ittousai tells us that Iwata told Diamond Online that the Wii U can technically support multiple screen-controllers, but that additional slabs would be too expensive to sell on their own. Iwata went on to say that the console would ship with only one, and that game developers should design titles under the assumption that each console will use a single Wii U controller.
Click to expand...

http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/18/nintendo-says-one-wii-u-controller-per-console-robs-player-two/


I will repeat it, and I stand by it: This is a stupid decision, and one can only hope that developers are gonna do their own thing here and incorporate multiple controllers if it enhances their gameplay possibilities.
 
^^^^

Nice to know that the Pads are more Tablets (with processing power) rather than just Touch Displays.

That would raise the cost of the things, though, to $200 - $250 a piece... :eek:
 
Eh? Where does it say that the pads have processing power of their own? From everything I've seen, they're simply dumb slates that rely on the base unit for data.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back