Topic: Wii U's launch price(s): Is it worth it?

[broodwars]

Whether consoles are "worth" their price is very subjective and is very much dependent on the games you want to buy for it.  I don't think it's worth the price right now.  $300 for what is essentially 6-year-old tech, a controller I don't want (and Nintendo hasn't made me want), and storage space inferior to both my existing HD consoles for a launch library I also largely don't want is just too much for me.  And that's before taking into account the $350 for the Wii U version actually worth buying.

I already said as much on NFR 4.5 along with Ceric and Shaymin, but it was worth repeating.

Maybe if Nintendo had exclusive games at launch I wanted, I would consider the $300-$350 price tag worth it, but right now it really isn't.  I really feel that the Wii U should be a $200 console with a $250 premium version based on the exclusives they're releasing early on.  Right now, it just doesn't seem worth more than that to me, and considering I don't currently regret my $250+ for my Vita that's saying something.

[Stogi]

6 year old tech is a bit much, no?

Neither the PS3 or 360 is capable of 1080p; not to mention 1080p while streaming a 480p signal as well. Still I see where you are coming from.

I don't know if it's worth it for me either, but I have an insatiable urge to at least try it.

[broodwars]

6 year old tech is a bit much, no?

Neither the PS3 or 360 is capable of 1080p; not to mention 1080p while streaming a 480p signal as well. Still I see where you are coming from.

I don't know if it's worth it for me either, but I have an insatiable urge to at least try it.

Both the PS3 and 360 can output to 1080p.  I should know: I had to test games displaying at those resolutions during my time with EA.  It's just that most developers don't run their games natively at those resolutions so the consoles have to upscale them.

And given that 480p is apparently not considered high definition, the Gamepad interests me even less than it already does.  It's where all the ****ty-looking game content will be displayed.  So while the Wii U having to output two video streams at once is technically impressive, I don't think the average person is really going to appreciate that compared to having games that look like they couldn't be done by a 360 or PS3.

[lolmonade]

After all the extra Wii remotes, nunchucks, classic controllers, and buying a game for my Wii, I was easily over $400 into the hole when I got mine.
 
I think i'll be just fine dropping $350 on the premium version.

[Stogi]

6 year old tech is a bit much, no?

Neither the PS3 or 360 is capable of 1080p; not to mention 1080p while streaming a 480p signal as well. Still I see where you are coming from.

I don't know if it's worth it for me either, but I have an insatiable urge to at least try it.

Both the PS3 and 360 can output to 1080p.  I should know: I had to test games displaying at those resolutions during my time with EA.  It's just that most developers don't run their games natively at those resolutions so the consoles have to upscale them.

And given that 480p is apparently not considered high definition, the Gamepad interests me even less than it already does.  It's where all the ****ty-looking game content will be displayed.  So while the Wii U having to output two video streams at once is technically impressive, I don't think the average person is really going to appreciate that compared to having games that look like they couldn't be done by a 360 or PS3.

I don't know the full specs, but what I have read says it can output 720 to both the TV and gamepad or 1080p and 480p. It could be different who knows. I wish BnM was here. Actually I wish PRO was here to explain it.

But to your point. Developers don't run their games at 1080p natively because the framerate would be sub par, so saying that a console COULD output 1080p is much different than actually doing it.

That's not the point of the system though. It's a DS home console. It's a take the Netflix into the bathroom console. It's a "Here you go, developers. You have everything you'd ever need." console. It's power is only a piece of what makes it interesting.

Before this gets deep, let me just say that I agree with you. I won't be picking up the console till Pikmin 3 comes out.

[broodwars]

It's a "Here you go, developers. You have everything you'd ever need." console. It's power is only a piece of what makes it interesting.

The problem is that what the Wii U can do technically is insufficient to keep the console relevant for 3rd parties beyond a few years.  The larger developers have already been grumbling for the last year or two about wanting to work on console hardware akin to modern PCs.  I don't see how 5-6 years more of the same with the Wii U will be well-received outside of costs by most developers.

But we'll see, I guess.  There are just so many uncertainties surrounding the Wii U that I can't justify paying $350+ for "potential" I'm not sure is actually there.

[Pixelated Pixies]

The problem is that what the Wii U can do technically is insufficient to keep the console relevant for 3rd parties beyond a few years.  The larger developers have already been grumbling for the last year or two about wanting to work on console hardware akin to modern PCs.  I don't see how 5-6 years more of the same with the Wii U will be well-received outside of costs by most developers.

Excellent point.

[Ceric]

Both the PS3 and 360 can output to 1080p.  I should know: I had to test games displaying at those resolutions during my time with EA.  It's just that most developers don't run their games natively at those resolutions so the consoles have to upscale them.

Because they can't.

And given that 480p is apparently not considered high definition, the Gamepad interests me even less than it already does.  It's where all the ****ty-looking game content will be displayed.

How bad does the 3DS look? Its 400x240 (Per Eye)/320x240 (Bottom Screen)
How bad does the PSP look?  Its 480 × 272
How bad Does the iPhone - 3gs look? Its 480 × 320

We are talking 853×480 for Gamepad.  If it looks bad that is fully the developers fault.

Your not going to get it that's fine but, the tech is definitely not 6 years old. 

Honestly your kidding yourself if you think that any Multi-platform game will look any different then the other.  When the PS2 reign supreme All the Multi-platform games looked like PS2 games for the most part.

Nintendo could make a show perfect Playable Transformer Primes and you could still argue that isn't much better then the PS3 or 360.  Shoot just look at Gran Turismo.  That game always looks at least 1 generation ahead of the generation its released.

It's a "Here you go, developers. You have everything you'd ever need." console. It's power is only a piece of what makes it interesting.

The problem is that what the Wii U can do technically is insufficient to keep the console relevant for 3rd parties beyond a few years.  The larger developers have already been grumbling for the last year or two about wanting to work on console hardware akin to modern PCs.  I don't see how 5-6 years more of the same with the Wii U will be well-received outside of costs by most developers.

But we'll see, I guess.  There are just so many uncertainties surrounding the Wii U that I can't justify paying $350+ for "potential" I'm not sure is actually there.

Developers have been grumbling about that since the generation after the SNES.

[broodwars]

Both the PS3 and 360 can output to 1080p.  I should know: I had to test games displaying at those resolutions during my time with EA.  It's just that most developers don't run their games natively at those resolutions so the consoles have to upscale them.

Because they can't.

Sure they could, depending on the type of game and how many effects were run.  The point was he said the 360 and PS3 couldn't "do" 1080p (note the vague-ness), and they can output in that resolution.

How bad does the 3DS look? Its 400x240 (Per Eye)/320x240 (Bottom Screen)
How bad does the PSP look?  Its 480 × 272
How bad Does the iPhone - 3gs look? Its 480 × 320

"Pretty Bad, depending on whether 2D sprite or 3D polygonal", "Bad, depending on the same", and "I don't know. I don't own an iPhone", respectively.

Honestly your kidding yourself if you think that any Multi-platform game will look any different then the other.  When the PS2 reign supreme All the Multi-platform games looked like PS2 games for the most part.

If the Wii U were more powerful, it could receive current PC ports instead, which would look considerably better than the PS3 or 360 are capable of right now.

Nintendo could make a show perfect Playable Transformer Primes and you could still argue that isn't much better then the PS3 or 360.  Shoot just look at Gran Turismo.  That game always looks at least 1 generation ahead of the generation its released.

If Nintendo had shown a game that really showed that the Wii U was in a league of its own above the PS3 or 360, you wouldn't hear a complaint from me about it.  But they haven't because Nintendo is so damn paranoid about showing games more than 2 months out these days.  So all they've shown are kind of typical-looking launch games outside of Rayman.  If you were Wii-only, that's great.  If you weren't, that's not impressive.

[Ceric]

...
If the Wii U were more powerful, it could receive current PC ports instead, which would look considerably better than the PS3 or 360 are capable of right now.
...

You mean the PC Port of the Console Versions?  There are very few non-indie games that are console compatible that are Pure PC Games.

[Stogi]

I think I can solve this with two videos, both 1080p. One in alpha (Wii U). One in beta (PC).

[rlse9]

I guess it's worth it if you're really interested in the games at launch but there aren't any games that I'm really interested in the launch window outside of Pikmin 3.  I'm still not sure that I'm sold on the tablet controller revolutionizing gaming and also of how long third party support will last for the system.  I still have several Wii games I own that I haven't finished and a couple more I'd like to buy and more important things to spend money on, so at this point the Wii U isn't worth it to me.  If I had a surplus of money, maybe I'd pick one up, but at this point I don't see the value in buying one.

[tendoboy1984]

I think I can solve this with two videos, both 1080p. One in alpha (Wii U). One in beta (PC).

Yeah there's a reason why the PS3 and Xbox 360 aren't getting this game. I guess it proves how powerful the Wii U is. The other systems can't run it with full HD 1080p graphics and full-screen antialiasing.

[Oblivion]

What you seen Watch Dogs? Yeah.

[Nemo]

For me, it's not worth it. Last Black Friday, I got an XBox 360 with a beefy hard drive (and 2 games I didn't particularly want) for $199. For $100-150 more, I get no hard drive (which I'd have to buy seperately) and a gimicky controller. I predict that like with the Wii controls and the DS/3DS second screen, some games will make good use of the new controller, but that'll be a small batch of games. I mean, how many games really NEEDed the Wiimote? There's a few. But there's also a few where the Wiimote controls made the game worse. And then the majority could've gotten by fine with a standard controller.

So, in my opinion, the controller just doesn't add enough value to place it over the 360.

Also, I feel burned by the 3DS price cut.

Also, no Pikmin 3 at launch. Pikmin 3 is a system seller for me. If I do break down and get a Wii U, this'll be why.

[marty]

I won't be getting a Wii U for the foreseeable future.  The problem is there aren't any launch games that I really want.  The Wii U could be priced at $100 and I still wouldn't get one at launch.  I hope some cool games are on the way, that make me want to get a Wii U, but they haven't appeared yet and I'm not sure they will.  I don't see the point in getting hyped up and buying something that may never prove itself to be something I would value.

[Adrock]

The word "gimmick" is almost always thrown around in a negative way. Shame, really. It's not inherently a bad thing.

The GamePad itself isn't enough to convince me to buy a Wii U though I never looked at it that way even if it's the most defining aspect of the Wii U. For the most part, I see it as an enhancement rather than a requirement or replacement. After all, it's basically attached to a regular controller. To me, that's the difference between the Wii Remote and the GamePad. The Wii Remote was an "or" controller while the GamePad is an "and" controller. It does everything a standard controller does with the option of a second screen and that's where its value lies. No, it's not "needed" but I'd certainly say it's welcome. It certainly shouldn't be used as a mark against the console. It will either make a game better (like the bottom screen did for Ocarina of Time 3D) or just not be used.

I'm not sure there will ever be a game released for the Wii U that makes the GamePad the reason to buy the console. It has a variety of uses, but in terms of gameplay, I don't think there's anything it can provide that we haven't seen before. That's still okay. It doesn't have to change the world. It just has to be an input device for games and as long as it does that well, I believe it's worthwhile.

I'm leaning on getting a Wii U at launch just so I have one since I know I want one and I don't want to worry about finding one if it sells out. I can certainly see why some would pass on it. There's a lot of variety in the launch lineup, but if you have another console, some of the immediacy is gone. I can wait on the exclusives. I'm only buying New Super Mario Bros. U because I have it mostly paid off in trade credit at Play N Trade and it's a 1st party title so it won't drop in price for at least 11 years.

[Ceric]

...
I'm leaning on getting a Wii U at launch just so I have one since I know I want one and I don't want to worry about finding one if it sells out.
...

There the sentiment.  As for the Early Adopter Tax.  It will be at most $50.

[BlackNMild2k1]

...
I'm leaning on getting a Wii U at launch just so I have one since I know I want one and I don't want to worry about finding one if it sells out.
...

There the sentiment.  As for the Early Adopter Tax.  It will be at most $50.

But for that $50, you get to claim your online name without having to add meaningless numbers to the end of it. Would hate for someone else in the Miiverse to be running around with your name.

[Chozo Ghost]

The original Xbox 1 which came out in 2001 had an 8gb internal hard drive. This is exactly the same as the Wii U (basic) model. So its taken Nintendo 11 years to release a console with the same amount of internal storage that someone else did way back in 2001. Then combine that with a CPU which is slower than that of existing 6-7 year old consoles...

[Pixelated Pixies]

The original Xbox 1 which came out in 2001 had an 8gb internal hard drive. This is exactly the same as the Wii U (basic) model. So its taken Nintendo 11 years to release a console with the same amount of internal storage that someone else did way back in 2001. Then combine that with a CPU which is slower than that of existing 6-7 year old consoles...

lol, it's refreshing to me when people stand up and point at the elephant in the room. I often feel that I need to couch my opinions in such a way as to not offend people who are excited about the Wii U.

[Adrock]

The CPU is slower?! When did this happen? What an outrage! I was going to buy a Wii U, but now? NO MORE! How can anyone make good games on it now that this brand new information has suddenly come to light? They should halt production immediately, toss already completed inventory in a landfill, then just kill themselves.

[Ceric]

Also I'm going to Toss Any Computer that has a Processor that is running at less then 3.8Ghz Why  Because I could get that over 8 years ago.

How can anyone make good games with PC running at anything lower than 3.8Ghz slower.

[Caterkiller]

@ Broodwars

I completely understand where you are coming from, your situation with every system is way different from mine with just a Wii but I don't think it's fair to call the Wii U hardware 6 year old technology.

I am not implying it will be as good as the PS420 hardware but we have word from the developers that the tech inside is modern compared to what's in the PS3 or 360. The games we see now apparently have all started on another system, and aside from Batman all these multiplat games look slightly better than the other versions. Keeping in mind these games are the latest generation of what those systems have to offer and at the same time being 1st gen Wii U, I think Wii U is going t have a lot growing room visually.

[MrPhishfood]

Your kidding yourselves if any of you think a console 2-4 times more powerful than a Wii U will have innovative games. The more money it takes to make a game the less risk the developers can make when it comes to style and innovation. Even if the developers were willing to take risks the publishers won't. Its not just about gaming its about business and if a game doesn't have enough mass market appeal to justify the huge development cost then its not worth making. The only people who can afford to take risks more than anyone else are first party developers.

You'd think with more power in a console it suddenly opens up all these possibilities that were previously closed off but its actually the opposite. I predict the Wii U will be where its at when it comes to innovation.