Topic: Is the Wii U underpowered?

[Agent-X-]

Being underpowered is not a matter of opinion. It is, or it isn't. Simple as that. And like it has already been established... it is.

Oh YOU... YOU win. Ok?


And the PS3 was underpowered last generation due to the inferior graphics card it was given. The 360 bested it.


The PS2 was underpowered as well. It was inferior to GameCube AND Xbox.


The original Playstation was also underpowered. There was no way for it to do even half the stuff the N64 did.

Can we finally put this debate to rest? The factor by which the Wii U is underpowered is far less relevant today than the storage medium capacity that hamstrung the N64 or the RAM limitations that bit the GameCube. We don't even need to dredge up the Wii's technical limitations. The Wii U simply isn't in any way, shape, or form that far behind the PS4.

Few issues with your post. I'm not sure if your first comment was sarcastic enough. Second, the PS3 technically had the most power, but very few developers besides first parties hardly ever took advantage of if due to the retarded Cell architecture.


The PS1 was technically weaker, but the N64 had the retarded cartridges that developers had to work with and made certain things difficult. Hell, certain games are still hard to emulate with today's technology because of how weird it was made.

Hey Oblivion, I'm sorry for directing my comment at you when it should be directed at everyone who is stating the Wii U is underpowered. The fact is that the hardware can handle less, but we're arguing semantics when it comes to discussing whether the system is underpowered compared to its competitors. It's also a fact that its competitors are expected to handle a lot more general purpose computing while also playing games (simultaneously). The Wii U isn't expected to do nearly that much. More of its hardware resources are dedicated to gaming.


I'm going to agree with your counterpoint regarding the PS3. Developers never fully realized the potential of the Cell processor. I'll contend that the PS3 had poor architectural design, and at the heart of the PS3 experience was an inferior GPU. Owning a PS3 and having owned a 360, I'm not terribly biased for either system. Frankly, I was never very impressed with the 360. I always felt that its texture rendering was starkly lacking. However, the PS3 never stood tall in FPS games. Time and again, the PS3 GPU handicapped the experience. The PS3 could not maintain the framerate or screen resolution of the 360, and therefore I am snidely stating that under the same guidelines being applied to the Wii U, the PS3 was underpowered next to the 360. No amount of Cell harnessing overcame the poor GPU.


Now, the better debate is whether the Wii U hardware is the biggest limiting factor to third party support this round. I don't believe it is. I believe Nintendo needs to clean the poop out of the bed post-launch if they want anyone to still climb into it with them. I've even thought about trying to sell my Wii U, and I know that's not going to work out well for me if I do. Still, if I had to pick between Nintendo platforms right now, the 3DS is kicking everybody's ass and taking names. It's also a big reason why I don't have a killer app for my Wii U.


**** you Nintendo!

[ymeegod]

"More of its hardware resources are dedicated to gaming."

.  That's not true, 1/2 the WII U memory is for OS, not sure about it's cores but I'm guessing one core Is reserved for the OS/gamepad. 

MS stated that 3GB's of ram is reserved  and I'm not sure about the cores.  Still since it had 8GB to begin with it's still has a higher % of resources reserved for gaming than the WII U.

 

[Mop it up]

I don't care either way, and in the end it won't matter much.

[Kytim89]

I view the Wii U as a rescue ship for the gaming industry. What I mean by this is that the development costs for the PS4 and Xbone will push a lot of developers towards the Wii U due to its cheapness. Only the elites of the third party (Ubisoft, Activision, EA, Take Two, etc) will be able to afford to make top tier games for those systems. The rest will find some middle ground on the Wii U. It is what someone else said earlier in this topic, the game industry is heading for a blood bath.

[ymeegod]

" view the Wii U as a rescue ship for the gaming industry. "

Didn't you say that about the wii as well?  Developers don't have to spend money to make quality games, Minecraft comes screaming to mind but there's plenty of other examples like Demon Souls (PS3). 

If I was developing a game now I wouldn't bother making an WII U game when I can target three systems (XboxOne,PS4, PC) at once since there are all x86 systems which when combined their numbers is going be a much larger user base?

[EasyCure]

I think with the "rescue ship" argument, the keyword that flaws your statement is "now". Those new PS4/One games look awfully pretty, and more than pretty expensive.

If they don't break even companies are going to go under and when enough go under the industry might realize that their penis measuring contest arms race is doing no good for them and scale things back..

But why does that automatically mean that those devs will be crawling to Nintendo as the cheap alternative? Well if Sony or MS DEMAND that games released on their systems be the highest of highest end, perhaps Nintendo really will be the cheap alternative where profit can be made. So in this scenario, while if you were developing a game "now" sure it makes sense to go with the over-all larger user base, but when developing that game means you'll potentially go out of business, you'll go where you can to survive.

But that's an awful lot of assumptions.

[broodwars]

If such a blood bath as Kytim desires were to occur, developers would run to iOS and Android before they ran to Nintendo.

[Jabs]

Sony originally locked the full speed of the PSP CPU at 266 MHz before unlocking the full 333 MHz like two years after release with a firmware update. I don't think Sony ever officially explained why they locked the CPU, but most speculated it was due to battery life concerns.

There was also a rumor (I don't remember if it was confirmed) that Nintendo did something similar with 3DS and unlocked a second CPU for 25% more processing. I'd imagine battery life being a concern here as well. I believe this rumor also mentioned something about Nintendo figuring out a way of handling stereoscopic 3D which would reduce the strain on the CPU for more processing power (of course, not using 3D entirely would help out even more).

It was most likely both where due to battery life as any titles that used these functions had limitations. On PSP Wifi/Networking had to be switched off. On 3DS the StreetPass/SpotPass Functionality is lost. Just trade offs for better speed over functionality. 

If this additional core thing is true, the battery life explanation doesn't really work here. I guess the dev kit reasoning works. Even so, I doubt it would open up Wii U to Super Saiyan levels of power like people are making it seem.

I don't even think it exists simply because we haven't found anything additional on the wafers. Almost everything is accounted for internally thank to those great die shots from Chipworks, unless there is a hidden processor on the GPU (other than Starlet) then it doesn't exist. And if there is something on the GPU it must be very small and have little impact on performance.[/font]

By the way, the GamePad is a gimmick. That's not inherently bad. People just often read it that way. I love the GamePad though only games that can use it well should use it at all. Just because something is there doesn't mean it has to be forced into every game.

Gimmick is an over used word that tries to make the idea seam cheaper or less important than it really is. Like you said, it's an awesome feature but it's not a requirement.

The PS1 was technically weaker, but the N64 had the retarded cartridges that developers had to work with and made certain things difficult. Hell, certain games are still hard to emulate with today's technology because of how weird it was made.

Just talk to a developer on the N64 about the "joys" of microcoding the graphics side of N64. Step back and watch them fume with rage.

That's not true, 1/2 the WII U memory is for OS, not sure about it's cores but I'm guessing one core Is reserved for the OS/gamepad.

As far as we know the Gamepad video is encoded with dedicated hardware on the GPU, a task such as that is too slow on a CPU. That said we could still lose a core to the OS, I haven't really spoken to many developers in detail on how the Wii U works and I'm sure they wouldn't' tell me anyway.

[Ian Sane]

I think the problem with this "rescue ship" idea is that Nintendo is too conservative to lead the industry.  I don't just mean in terms of hardware, but in terms of making games period.  Right now their favourite genre is one that went out-of-fashion over 15 years ago.  They're behind the times in online gaming and they are notoriously restrictive and inflexible.  With their current attitude they will just hold the industry back.  Not spending to oblivion is the ONLY thing they have going for them right now.  You can push game design forward with lesser hardware but Nintendo is not the one doing that.

I really don't like the approach that ANY of the big three are taking.  Sony's the least offensive but they're still on the "massive high budget hit or bankrupting failure" model which will just make gaming more conservative as the stakes are too big to take risks.  They're all lumbering dinosaurs that will either kill the industry or get wiped out by a new generation.

[Adrock]

Who is fit to lead the industry? Nintendo is the company with weird ideas. Microsoft is the company with bad ideas. And Sony is the company with no ideas. It's not all black and white, but as it stands, that's pretty close.

[broodwars]

I really don't like the approach that ANY of the big three are taking.  Sony's the least offensive but they're still on the "massive high budget hit or bankrupting failure" model which will just make gaming more conservative as the stakes are too big to take risks.  They're all lumbering dinosaurs that will either kill the industry or get wiped out by a new generation.

I would have to disagree there. Yes, Sony does dump a ridiculous amount of money into their AAA releases, but they also bankroll Indie; experimental ; and so-called "mid-tier" projects like Sly Cooper: Thieves in Time; Journey; and the upcoming Rain.  They have a good variety, which is one of the reasons I really like their software library.

As for Nintendo, I like platformers. I think it's sad that the genre's been relegated to the Indie domain and the occasional nostalgia trip.  I just wish platformers weren't the primary and sometimes seemingly only games Nintendo makes.  That's why I've been saying for years that Nintendo needed to expand its studios in the West and get developers working on games that EAD Tokyo wouldn't make.

[TJ Spyke]

Right now their favourite genre is one that went out-of-fashion over 15 years ago.

New Super Mario Bros. Wii - 27.61 million
Super Mario Galaxy - 11.72 million
Super Mario 3D Land - 8.29 million
New Super Mario Bros. 2 - 6.42 million
Super Mario Galaxy 2 - 6.36 million
New Super Mario Bros. U - 2.15 million

Yes, totally out of fashion. -_- It's also a tiny percentage of their games, it's just they get the most media attention.

[ThePerm]

those numbers also show diminishing returns...but you have to give u and 2 credit for being on new systems with small install bases. I kinda feel Nintendo gets fucked though. Sony's system is only $399 while Nintendo's is $299 and ati is giving them a much crappier chip. Considering Nintendo and ATI's longstanding and very profitable business relationship you would think they would give Nintendo the deal.

[pokepal148]

i predict by january that the basic set is gone and the deluxe set will be dropped to 269.99$ at the most with things like the console stand and the noncharging gamepad stand taken out.

i also expect nintendoland to be either preinstalled or removed from the bundle and sold separately with a remote plus bundled

[Evan_B]

Who is fit to lead the industry? Nintendo is the company with weird ideas. Microsoft is the company with bad ideas. And Sony is the company with no ideas. It's not all black and white, but as it stands, that's pretty close.

There we have it, ladies and gentlemen.

[Oblivion]

I'm fairly certain no one in the industry has good ideas.

[broodwars]

those numbers also show diminishing returns...but you have to give u and 2 credit for being on new systems with small install bases. I kinda feel Nintendo gets fucked though. Sony's system is only $399 while Nintendo's is $299 and ati is giving them a much crappier chip. Considering Nintendo and ATI's longstanding and very profitable business relationship you would think they would give Nintendo the deal.

ATI's giving Nintendo a "crappier chip" because Nintendo commissioned a crappier chip from them. The Wii U is exactly what Nintendo asked for.  It's overpriced at $350 because Nintendo just had to have that stupid, expensive, gimmicky GamePad.  It's just like how the PS4 is $100 cheaper than the Xbone because they removed the expensive PS Move camera from the box.  Maybe if Nintendo had made the Pro controller the primary Wii U controller & made the Gamepad the ridiculously expensive add-on, the Wii U could've been priced at something more reasonable. But Nintendo wanted its gimmick center stage, and the price is where it is.

[Luigi Dude]

those numbers also show diminishing returns...but you have to give u and 2 credit for being on new systems with small install bases.

The only diminished returns is Galaxy 2 selling less then Galaxy 1.  But 3D Land is already higher then Galaxy 2 and on its way to surpassing Galaxy 1, hence why we're getting 3D World instead of a Galaxy 3 for the Wii U's 3D Mario.  Plus you already said NSMB 2 and U have only been on the market for a short time so no one can really compare them to the other NSMB that were out for years.  NSMB DS and Wii didn't sell those 27 million + in less then a year.

[Mop it up]

And even in the case of the Super Mario Galaxy games, the first one came out over two years before the second, and has been sold at $20 for a while now, whereas the sequel is still $50.

[ThePerm]

the question is which 2 am I talking about?

[shingi_70]

If the PS4/one are only home to ex[ensive big budget  industry killing games than why did Sony show off a big push for indies at E3.


Plus you can expect costs to go down on the third party side as they from using thigs like Unreal/Cryengine too in house engines (nearly every EA game was either Frostbite or Ignite.)

[Sarail]

those numbers also show diminishing returns...but you have to give u and 2 credit for being on new systems with small install bases. I kinda feel Nintendo gets fucked though. Sony's system is only $399 while Nintendo's is $299 and ati is giving them a much crappier chip. Considering Nintendo and ATI's longstanding and very profitable business relationship you would think they would give Nintendo the deal.

ATI's giving Nintendo a "crappier chip" because Nintendo commissioned a crappier chip from them. The Wii U is exactly what Nintendo asked for.  It's overpriced at $350 because Nintendo just had to have that stupidly fun, somewhat overpriced (in Japan), full-of-innovative-ideas-if-devs-would-push-themselves-to-tap-in-to-it GamePad.  It's just like how the PS4 is $100 cheaper than the Xbone because they removed the expensive PS Move camera from the box.  Maybe if Nintendo had made the Pro controller the primary Wii U controller & made the Gamepad the ridiculously expensive add-on, the Wii U could've been priced at something more reasonable. But Nintendo wanted its gimmick center stage, and the price is where it is.

Corrected. Quit being so freaking negative, brood. Geez.

[shingi_70]

Question? Does power really matter when the bet games at the show looked like this?

[NWR_insanolord]

For many games, Wii U support would be relatively easy to include. The issue right now isn't a matter of power, it's about sales. If publishers were more confident that their games would sell on the platform we'd likely be seeing virtually every major third party title for the rest of the year on Wii U. Even once we've fully transitioned to the "next generation" (which won't be for another two years at least) a lot of things could still be made to work, if the perceived financial incentive is there.

[pokepal148]

For many games, Wii U support would be relatively easy to include. The issue right now isn't a matter of power, it's about sales. If publishers were more confident that their games would sell on the platform we'd likely be seeing virtually every major third party title for the rest of the year on Wii U. Even once we've fully transitioned to the "next generation" (which won't be for another two years at least) a lot of things could still be made to work, if the perceived financial incentive is there.

EXACTLY. next gen isn't the massive leap that the PS3/360 were. What Nintendo needs to do is four things.

1st: create a development program designed to transfer software from x86 to the Wii U cheaply and easily.

2nd: offer a list of "here are things you could do with the gamepad" and make things like off tv play easy to implement

3rd: give developers the opportunity to access promotions such as nintendo direct.

4th: do everything you possibly can to appeal to indies.