Topic: The Sun slams the Wii U - Water is wet.

[Caterkiller]

Some times I wonder why I bother with forums......
to those who disagree with my title "The Sun slams the Wii U" - I have no patience for your pedantic despotism. I think that statements like "Wii+DS=Fail" and describing the Wii U as "drastically over priced" constitute a slam.
Please note my use of the term "I think" and accept that yours is not the only opinion of worth on the whole internet. Several UK game sites picked up on the story too, CVG described it thusly:
"...to categorically instruct readers to not buy a new console - one built by the most experienced console maker in history, no less - is pushing things a bit far."



ANYWAY. I shared the Sun piece because it is very badly written and shows little understanding of how the gamepad works and what it does  (even less of how the Vita works and what software is available for it). Which I found funny. A bit annoying too, but mostly funny.
So far as I can tell just Little Big Planet 2 and 4 PS2 HD remakes offer similar features to the Gamepad when used with a Vita - and that's it. It's all an experiment for Sony and there are no other announced games that are planned to build on it, yet. Compared with all of the Wii U launch window games using Gamepad features in some way, and with it being a core aspect of the console (which the Vita will never be for PS3 owners) all future releases are likely to continue to support it. Again, I am a Vita owner and I like it. It ain't a Gamepad.


I do think that Wii U is over priced, but not "drastically" so, I will follow the Sun's one decent piece of advice and wait to see if there is a price cut next year. Also, they are right about the lack of decent exclusives (so far anyway).

Wasn't nobody disagreeing with you. The title fits and your mad at nothing. Post more!

[Chozo Ghost]

utterly disgusting 480p graphics.

For most of our lives 480p graphics was all we knew. Its funny how something that a decade ago was standard, normal, and accepted is now rejected and spit on. No one complained about the N64, Gamecube, and so on having lousy 480p output, but with the Wii that's all you hear these days.

[Adrock]

For most of our lives 480p graphics was all we knew. Its funny how something that a decade ago was standard, normal, and accepted is now rejected and spit on. No one complained about the N64, Gamecube, and so on having lousy 480p output, but with the Wii that's all you hear these days.

For clarification, "paltry and utterly disgusting 480p graphics" was not to be taken seriously. Refer to previous post for context.

[broodwars]

utterly disgusting 480p graphics.

For most of our lives 480p graphics was all we knew. Its funny how something that a decade ago was standard, normal, and accepted is now rejected and spit on. No one complained about the N64, Gamecube, and so on having lousy 480p output, but with the Wii that's all you hear these days.

HD TVs were also not very common in those days, where SD graphics look considerably worse.  Now HD TVs are commonplace, and standards change to fit what looks good in high resolution.  Standards change over time as tastes and technology evolve.  That's normal.

[Mop it up]

No one complained about the N64, Gamecube, and so on having lousy 480p output, but with the Wii that's all you hear these days.

The Nintendo 64 can't output 480p. The majority of games are 240i, with a select few being 480i.

HD TVs were also not very common in those days, where SD graphics look considerably worse

It depends on the TV, SD content looks better on my new TV than on my CRT. I think the bigger issue is that the average TV is larger now, and so you can really see the pixels (i.e. jaggies) that make up the games because of how much larger they are.

[Ian Sane]

Graphics aren't the issue.  My concern has never been that Wii U games might not be pretty.  The issue has always been the hardware gap being large enough that third parties don't support the Wii U.  Everyone said the same thing about Wii graphics being good enough.  Well that's all fine and good but third parties did not share the same sentiment.  They just ignored the Wii.  Were they "wrong" in doing so?  Who cares?  All that matters is that they didn't make games for it.  So while you can feel good that you're not a graphics whore, that self-satisfactory feeling is not worth more to me than actual games.

If it was up to what I feel is "good enough" graphically we'd all still be playing Super Nintendo.  Our opinion of what graphics or what hardware is "good enough" means squat.  What do the developers feel is good enough?  That indicates what games we actually get.

[Louieturkey]

If it was up to what I feel is "good enough" graphically we'd all still be playing Super Nintendo.  Our opinion of what graphics or what hardware is "good enough" means squat.  What do the developers feel is good enough?  That indicates what games we actually get.

Not really.  If a developer decided all they were going to make was SNES level graphics games and nobody bought those games, the company would go out of business.  If enough people buy those games to make the company a profit, then those games were justified.  Why developers make the games, those same games are dictated by what people are actually buying.  The only games out there that are solely up to the developers are ones that are independent and made the game completely without a publisher, then published it online themselves without any money from kickstarter or another publisher.  They also would have to make it for themselves only because if they made it with intent to sell it, they would have to make it accessible to more than just themselves.

So all I'm really saying is there are many factors dictating what graphics are used including the developer, the publisher, the media, and the public that buys the games.  It's not up to just one entity.

[Chozo Ghost]

Everyone said the same thing about Wii graphics being good enough.  Well that's all fine and good but third parties did not share the same sentiment.  They just ignored the Wii.  Were they "wrong" in doing so?  Who cares?  All that matters is that they didn't make games for it.

That was exactly the reason Sega gave for not bringing the latest Sonic game to the Wii. They said it "couldn't be done" because the Wii didn't have HD graphics. But did it really need to be in HD? The same goes for Crapcom and Resident Evil 5 and Street Fighter IV. Both of those games COULD have been brought to the Wii, and both of those games would have sold well enough to justify the effort, but they rather just ignore it instead.

Graphically speaking third parties will no longer have this excuse on the Wii U, because it can pull 1080p and the PS420 isn't going to be doing any better than that. But that doesn't mean they won't find other excuses not to support Nintendo hardware... they always seem to.

[Adrock]

I'm sure the Wii couldn't handle certain games. Sonic Generations most likely wasn't one of them. There was a 3DS version after all. However, Sega did make Sonic Colors exclusive to Wii/DS the previous year so the absence of Sonic Generations probably had more to do with the lack of available teams. I suppose they could have farmed the game out to some random development team, but that certainly has its own set of cons.

It's hard to blame some of these companies for just not wanting to spend the resources on a Wii version of a game that may or may not sell. I get that, even if many companies left money on the table, but hindsight is 20/20 is and all that. Fortunately, Wii U won't have that problem for at least a few years because 3rd parties can just port games over, practically as is. Sure, they may not use the extra power, but I think fans should be happy to get the games as long as they aren't sloppy.

[Chozo Ghost]

I'm sure the Wii couldn't handle certain games.

I disagree. COD Black Ops and MW3 were ported onto the Wii... albeit in watered down forms. If those technically demanding games can exist on the Wii, then anything could have.

[broodwars]

I don't know why you get so hung up on Resident Evil 5, Chozo.  The game kind of sucked, anyway, and pointer controls wouldn't have fixed its main flaws.  Plus, that game is heavily designed around its online Co-Op element (which I think is its biggest problem), which the Wii definitely would have struggled to handle.

[Adrock]

And many companies don't want to water their games down. Selling a game known to be watered down already stacks the odds against it succeeding.

[Chozo Ghost]

And many companies don't want to water their games down. Selling a game known to be watered down already stacks the odds against it succeeding.

Every company wants to make money. The Wii had the largest install base and market share. Games like Resident Evil 4 sold well enough. So the RE fanbase is present on Nintendo systems, and has been since the Gamecube years. Why just kick them to the curb the way Capcom did? Sure, they made those half assed on rails spin offs, which no one wanted and didn't sell very well, and then Capcom whined and used that as a pretext to cut off further support.

And tell me how complicated is a 1 vs. 1 fighting game like Street Fighter IV to pull off? Sure, the Wii can't do HD, but in every other respect SFIV would have been doable. Fighting games do not demand uber hardware.

[broodwars]

Games like Resident Evil 4 sold well enough. So the RE fanbase is present on Nintendo systems, and has been since the Gamecube years. Why just kick them to the curb the way Capcom did? Sure, they made those half assed on rails spin offs, which no one wanted and didn't sell very well, and then Capcom whined and used that as a pretext to cut off further support.

1.  There's nothing half-assed about the Resident Evil Chronicles games.  Just because they're in a genre you don't like, that doesn't make them "half-assed".  Both games have pretty high production values for their genre; both are fairly long home console experiences with plenty of replay value; and I felt both had a very genuine Resident Evil feel to them (just without all the inane puzzles that series used back in the day).  Actually, I think I enjoyed Darkside Chronicles more than Resident Evil 5.

2.  Umbrella Chronicles sold well enough to justify a sequel.  Only Darkside Chronicles (which I think was a far better game, but simply released too late) didn't sell particularly well.

Honestly, I think the games that killed Capcom's support for the Wii weren't the RE Chronicles games.  I think you could point to the failure of Zack & Wiki and the less-then-stellar performance (compared to Japan) of Monster Hunter Tri in the West.

[Adrock]

@Chozo
I'll try to address everything but we're straying already. I said the Wii couldn't handle "certain games." Some couldn't be done at all while others would have to be "watered down" as you put it. I'm not disputing that some games could have been brought over, watered down or not. Each game is a case by case basis and 3rd parties decide what is and is not worth it. For the most part and this is just my opinion, I think 3rd parties did not want to make a Wii specific version of most of their games. This should, by all means, change for a while on Wii U since porting is ridiculously easy now/for now. Didn't Vigil Games say last year that they ported assets of the PS3/360 versions of Darksiders II to Wii U dev kits in like 3 weeks?

Sure, Street Fighter IV could probably be done on the Wii. There's a 3DS version after all and the power of the hardware is similar. Capcom just didn't think it was worth bringing over. I can't speak for anyone else, but I didn't buy it on 3DS and I certainly wouldn't have bought it on the Wii. I presume Capcom decided that 3DS and Wii reach different audiences and a portable version was a better opportunity for profit.

@Brood
Yeah, I liked the Chronicles games for what they were. They were fun even if I would have preferred a RE4 style game built from the ground up for the Wii.

How has Monster Hunter done on PS2/PSP? Are the less than stellar sales of Monster Hunter Tri more likely the result of the series general popularity in the US or the way games perform on the Wii?

[broodwars]

How has Monster Hunter done on PS2/PSP? Are the less than stellar sales of Monster Hunter Tri more likely the result of the series general popularity in the US or the way games perform on the Wii?

Well, just on a cursory search, this Siliconera article notes that Capcom was disappointed with the sales of Monster Hunter Freedom Unite in North America. I can't find any official sales numbers, but VGChartz is listing Freedom Unite as selling 920,000 combined units and Freedom 2 as selling 590,000 combined units in the West.  And remember, VGChartz probably inflated those numbers.  By contrast, Monster Hunter Tri (according to Siliconera) only sold 690,000 combined units on the Wii in the West.

So yeah, considering the install bases for the Wii and PSP, I think Tri's mere "sleeper hit" status was a disappointment for Capcom outside Japan (especially with Nintendo of America and Nintendo of Europe footing their region's server bills).

[EasyCure]

It's not so much that the Sun slams Wii U, but in an editorial, an author gives his opinion.

That's why The Sun is so terrible. They always give their opinion. Always.

Fixed (made the red clicky)