Make sure to have a spare USB hard drive handy.
http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/30626
The Wii U will feature 8 gigabytes of flash storage, Time reports.
Although the included internal memory is somewhat limited, Nintendo does give gamers the option of expanding the memory via SD cards or by utilizing one of the USB ports on the Wii U to connect an external hard drive. No details were given as to whether this would be limited in any way. Microsoft, for example, also supports the option for USB based storage but limits the devices to only 16 GB.
Well I find this disappointing. You'd think with all the work they spent fixing it after last year's E3 such as the Controllers, dual touch screen pad support, etc, that theiy would have taken a clue from succesful consoles released over a DECADE ago and added Native/Internal HDD support out of the box.
Just when I was getting excited, now I'm not as much. Good luck trying to win over existing Xbox and PS3 owners now Nintendo.
EPIC FAIL.
7 years is not a decade. 10 years is a decade. Over a decade means over 10 years. Learn English.I think he's talking about the original Xbox which came out in 2001.
Well, now we know how cheap Nintendo plans on being with the Wii U. My Wii's SD card holds 8 GB of storage, and that cost me $20 3 or so years ago. That is pathetic on Nintendo's part, and it makes me wonder how pathetically low their file size cap will be on Wii U. This just reminds me of that scene (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kk4n0SvG0-Y) in the original Austin Powers when Doctor Evil threatened the leaders of the modern world with a $1 million ransom, and everyone just starts laughing. With downloadable games only growing larger, Nintendo had better be extremely flexible with their file size cap, or they will be just as ignored by (GOOD) digital developers as they were on the Wii.
Now, looking at it from another angle that is a whopping double the amount of storage as the 4 GB Arcade-model Xbox 360, and I have a feeling that's how Nintendo's looking at it. Of course, Nintendo's not competing with the 360 or PS3 with the Wii U, but their successors and I'll be very surprised if either future console has less than 20-50 GB of storage by default.
I wasn't sure if this was confirmed when I read that Time article his morning.
8GB is pretty low. I wonder why Nintendo is so resistant to include a hard drive or even a bay if a user chooses to upgrade. How much would a 128GB HDD cost them to include?7 years is not a decade. 10 years is a decade. Over a decade means over 10 years. Learn English.I think he's talking about the original Xbox which came out in 2001.
I wasn't sure if this was confirmed when I read that Time article his morning.Console Size, Licensing cost, Power Requirements, and Customer Service obligations. I'll bet those 8gb of Flash are put directly onto the motherboard. That way they wouldn't have to pay the licensing fee for Sata (Which has to be tiny per unit, but that is besides the point) or have that particular controller chip. Can know the max draw of every component and put in the optimally priced power supply that is able to keep up with that. It just simplify design. We still haven't heard it will play back DVD or Blu-Ray and thats Licensing cost again.
8GB is pretty low. I wonder why Nintendo is so resistant to include a hard drive or even a bay if a user chooses to upgrade. How much would a 128GB HDD cost them to include?
3 years ago. Things are different now. I bought a 32 GB SD card for $30 for my 3DS.
Now, even with low included memory, do you honestly think Nintendo would continue putting a low limit on downloadable titles?
Nintendo has done stupid things in the past
8 GB will be fine for some people and should hold several games, especially since many games don't max out their storage medium at all.
Console Size, Licensing cost, Power Requirements, and Customer Service obligations. I'll bet those 8gb of Flash are put directly onto the motherboard. That way they wouldn't have to pay the licensing fee for Sata (Which has to be tiny per unit, but that is besides the point) or have that particular controller chip. Can know the max draw of every component and put in the optimally priced power supply that is able to keep up with that. It just simplify design. We still haven't heard it will play back DVD or Blu-Ray and thats Licensing cost again.I said "I wonder why..." rhetorically. I know why based on how they've typically have done business. I just don't think they're very good reasons.
I don't get what the huge problem is. Most casual gamers (Nintendo's main audience for this console) will never fill up their Wii U's memory, while the rest of us can expand the memory through external hardrives, USBs and SD Cards.Not a huge problem. It just suggests that Nintendo isn't taking core gaming as seriously as they should. The hard drive is optional. That sends a big message to 3rd parties who make a ton of profits off of DLC. Sure, casual gamers won't fill that space. They also wouldn't care/know it was there. So, it doesn't hurt them but it potentially hurts others, namely 3rd parties. Nintendo is unnecessarily intentionally handicapping their own hardware again. It won't kill them, but it's another one of those it's-better-to-have-than-not-have scenarios.
i dont see a reason to put a file size limit, i think it will be if your out of space "**** you, you have options"
I don't want a download-only or DLC-dominated future, I don't want tons of mandatory installs and patches to get software working that should run out of the box, I don't want my console to be a PC-lite experience. So not having a huge hard drive isn't really that bad in a lot of ways.
I don't understand people's disappointment.
Still, I'm personally probably never going to need more than the 8GB because I'm not downloading anything but patches and firmware updates.
Dear Nintendo: Curse you for not including more storage with your system! You should pack in an oversized hard drive that the vast majority of your userbase won't ever use and then charge extra for the privilege. I mean, I know I already have plenty of storage space I can use with my Wii U at home, but since I *need* more storage space (even though all I've done is complain about the lack of games and how I probably won't even get a Wii U anyway), it should be included.
Count me in the I don't care camp. The 8GB drive doesn't particularly bother me, either...as long as the Wii U is a reasonable price and their aren't any proprietary hardware restrictions on the external drives that can be used. I already have SD cards and external hard drives collecting dust that I could use. If it also keeps the size of the base unit down, I'm all for it.
Still, I'm personally probably never going to need more than the 8GB because I'm not downloading anything but patches and firmware updates.
Apparently, that internet thing isn't going away. 70+% of people are online. The average person online purchased 5 things and the 3ds hasn't been out that long.
Count me in the I don't care camp. The 8GB drive doesn't particularly bother me, either...as long as the Wii U is a reasonable price and their aren't any proprietary hardware restrictions on the external drives that can be used. I already have SD cards and external hard drives collecting dust that I could use. If it also keeps the size of the base unit down, I'm all for it.
Seriuosly, how do you people just have this stuff laying around? I have two USB external drives. But I paid about $100 each for them, and I'm *gasp* actually using them or I wouldn't have bought them in the first place. Thus they will not be earmarked for the Wii U. And I have a few SD cards, but nothing bigger than 8 gig. With my PS3 having an 80 gig hd, I know adding another 8 gig will be woefully inadequate.
Still, I'm personally probably never going to need more than the 8GB because I'm not downloading anything but patches and firmware updates.
That still might not be enough, because I know from experience on the PS3 that patches can frequently be hundreds of megabytes in size, or even gigabytes in size. The worst example I can recall from memory was the patch for Battlefield Bad Company 2 which was like 2 gigabytes or something like that. The reason the patch was so huge is because EA bundles their DLC in with it, so even if you have zero interest in buying that DLC you still have to download it anyway just to be compatible with the other players who might have it.
Do you see what I'm saying? When you start dealing with patches that are hundreds of megs or 1 or 2 gigabytes then that 8gb is going to be eroded real fast, because even if you don't buy DLC its going to be required for you to download it anyway for compatibility reasons.
Is it right to make all four of us pay for 32 GB cards when only one of us used it? Does it make a lick of business sense to price your item higher and limit those who you can sell it to based on a feature that few will use and those that do will be able to easily and optionally take care of on their own?
Anyway, if you're bitching about this, you shouldn't be, and you should be happy that the price will be lower because of this
Your analogy is flawed and you know it. A more apt analogy would be taking the screen out of the Gamepad.Is it right to make all four of us pay for 32 GB cards when only one of us used it? Does it make a lick of business sense to price your item higher and limit those who you can sell it to based on a feature that few will use and those that do will be able to easily and optionally take care of on their own?
You know what? You're right. Nintendo shouldn't make us pay for any feature we don't need. So while we're on that kick, how about we strip out that awful Wii U GamePad while we're at it? Nintendo didn't have a single game at E3 that makes me want to play games with that thing, and that's probably an $80-$100 controller with the cost getting passed on to me. I'm sure many core gamers like me would be just fine with just the likely $20 Pro controller that (unlike the GamePad) probably has a battery life longer than 2-3 hours.
Yeah, that logic doesn't work, does it? Just because you don't use a feature, that doesn't mean you exclude other gamers by not including it. Nintendo hyped this device last year as a machine for us, the core gamers who do download lots of games, who do care about storage. Judging by this topic, there's a great many people here who care about having storage on the Wii U, and for people like us 8 GB is a joke. To me, it shows that Nintendo still doesn't know what they want with the Wii U. I wonder how many 3rd parties are going to bother supporting a Nintendo digital platform where their userbase by default has very little storage? It's not like 3rd parties need much of a reason to ignore a Nintendo digital platform after the mess that was WiiWare.
"Is it right to make all four of us pay for 32 GB cards when only one of us used it? Does it make a lick of business sense to price your item higher and limit those who you can sell it to based on a feature that few will use and those that do will be able to easily and optionally take care of on their own?"
"Anyway, if you're bitching about this, you shouldn't be, and you should be happy that the price will be lower because of this, and you certainly will not *need* a larger HDD at launch (or probably any time soon after), and you can just add whatever USB HDD you want."
"I see a lot of people comparing this to the PS3. Which is a false comparison because its more like the 360. You have to take in addition to gaming functionality patching the PS3 gets patched most of the time to enable more media functions. New Codex, more efficient video support, etc."
"I see a lot of people comparing this to the PS3. Which is a false comparison because its more like the 360. You have to take in addition to gaming functionality patching the PS3 gets patched most of the time to enable more media functions. New Codex, more efficient video support, etc."A lot of the patches for PS3 have absolutely nothing to do with games was the overall point. Nothing to do with the games.
Do these video games turn into full length blu ray movies? I get the Wii wasn't close to PS3 as an online console. But the Wii-U is supposed to bring 1080p, voice chat, better online experience? I fail to see how Wii-U games won't at least compare to PS3 games as an experience unless you are already conceding that Wii-U won't have as good of online as current gen.
Your analogy is flawed and you know it. A more apt analogy would be taking the screen out of the Gamepad.
For console you would really need Ducks to line up and for Vita I don't know if Sony just likes shooting itself in the foot.
A lot of the patches for PS3 have absolutely nothing to do with games was the overall point. Nothing to do with the games.
A lot of the patches for PS3 have absolutely nothing to do with games was the overall point. Nothing to do with the games.
Please enlighten me then. What are these 2 gig patches doing if they don't fix known glitches, make the online experience better, or enhance the overall utilization of the game? Just a few examples would be great.
4.11
Network
The Internet browser has been improved for better support of interactive features and content display.> See details
Other
Your "PlayStation®Network account" is now a "Sony Entertainment Network account". You can continue using your current sign-in ID and password to sign in to PlayStation®Network.
New for 4.11: System software has been improved.
4.10
Setting the date and time automatically
The option [Set Automatically] has been added under Settings (Settings) > Date and Time Settings (Date and Time Settings). > See details
4.00
Upscaler output and Cinema conversion are now supported for Blu-ray Discâ„¢ (BDMV) content. "Blu-ray Discâ„¢" and "Blu-rayâ„¢" are trademarks of the Blu-ray Disc Association.
You can now select the items you want to update under (System Settings) > [Automatic Update]. This feature is exclusively for use by PlayStation®Plus members.
Two new system languages have been added: [English (United Kingdom)] and [Portuguese (Brazil)] are now available under (Settings) > (System Settings) > [System Language] .
3.73
Video
3D playback* of Blu-ray Javaâ„¢ ("BD-J") content is now supported. You can now enjoy
BD-J content recorded on Blu-ray 3Dâ„¢ discs.
DTS-HD audio output is now supported while playing Blu-ray 3Dâ„¢ content*.
Photo
MPO (Multi-Picture format) files for 3D photos and multi-angle photos can now be displayed under photo (Photo) and in photo (Photo Gallery).
3.61
Sony Network Change
3.50
The PS3â„¢ system can now play 3D content on Blu-ray 3Dâ„¢ discs.
3.4
PlayStation®Plus subscription service
The PlayStation®Plus subscription service package is now included on PlayStation®Network.
> See details
PlayStation®Network area of Photo Gallery
[PlayStation®Network Area] has been added under Settings (Photo Gallery). You can now use Photo Gallery to browse photos from Facebook® or Picasa™ Web Albums. You can also share photos from Photo Gallery with your Friends in PlayStation®Network.
> See details
Video Editor & Uploader
Using the video editing and uploading feature, you can now edit video content that is saved on your PS3â„¢ system's hard disk and upload it to Facebook or YouTubeâ„¢.
> See details
Facebook® is a service that helps you connect and share with the people in your life. Facebook is a registered trademark of Facebook, Inc. YouTube and Picasa™ Web Albums are trademarks of Google Inc.
Other new or revised features in version 3.40
Settings
[Deep Color Output (HDMI)] has been added as an option under Settings (Display Settings).
[Automatic Download] has been added as a feature under Settings (System Settings). This feature is exclusively for use by PlayStation®Plus members. > See details
The default setting for [System Auto-Off] under Settings (Power Save Settings) has been changed to [After 2 Hours].
Photo
You can now print a photo in Settings (Photo Gallery). > See details
You can now delete a photo in Settings (Photo Gallery). > See details
Friends
You can now see the trophy level of a Friend by selecting the Friend's avatar.
You know what? You're right. Nintendo shouldn't make us pay for any feature we don't need. So while we're on that kick, how about we strip out that awful Wii U GamePad while we're at it? Nintendo didn't have a single game at E3 that makes me want to play games with that thing, and that's probably an $80-$100 controller with the cost getting passed on to me. I'm sure many core gamers like me would be just fine with just the likely $20 Pro controller that (unlike the GamePad) probably has a battery life longer than 2-3 hours.
You're in luck! Here you go! (http://www.walmart.com/ip/Xbox-360-4GB-Console/14917960)
propriety storage needs to be going the way of the dodo. Which is why i think its GOOD that nintendo gives you the option to get your own storage rather than requiring you to by storage with the console.+1
The funny thing is, though, you seem to be in a tizzy because the Wii U has a small internal storage with the option to expand that. You're trying to make it sound as if that's a reason not to get a Wii U.
But a Wii U without the Game Pad and with a 120 GB hard drive is... still your XBox 360. Still no reason to get one.
A Wii U with a Game Pad and with OPTIONAL storage is... not a 360. Reason to get one? Up to you.
I've been quite explicit since the thing was announced that I had no interest whatsoever in the GamePad.
I've been quite explicit since the thing was announced that I had no interest whatsoever in the GamePad.
The Wii U isn't for you then.
There's a specific reason why the GamePad has been front-and-center of every single Wii U media piece. The GamePad is the thing that sets the Wii U apart from the PS3/360. If you already have one of those and don't care about the GamePad, then stay the course with your PS3/360. Use the $250+ and buy some games and be happy.
The GamePad is the thing that sets the Wii U apart from the PS3/360.
Still, I'm personally probably never going to need more than the 8GB because I'm not downloading anything but patches and firmware updates.
That still might not be enough, because I know from experience on the PS3 that patches can frequently be hundreds of megabytes in size, or even gigabytes in size. The worst example I can recall from memory was the patch for Battlefield Bad Company 2 which was like 2 gigabytes or something like that. The reason the patch was so huge is because EA bundles their DLC in with it, so even if you have zero interest in buying that DLC you still have to download it anyway just to be compatible with the other players who might have it.
Do you see what I'm saying? When you start dealing with patches that are hundreds of megs or 1 or 2 gigabytes then that 8gb is going to be eroded real fast, because even if you don't buy DLC its going to be required for you to download it anyway for compatibility reasons.
This does make me wonder if Nintendo will stick to their usual policy on whether to allow third parties to patch their games. Will that relax that restriction for Wii U, or given the small size will they still enforce that policy? That alone would probably be a deterrent for some developers.
broodwars already said it. Nintendo games. But if you're not excited about 2D Mario, Pikmin and games like Nintendo Land - not to mention knowing that you're going to get a great quantity of games from Nintendo like we've gotten on every single other Nintendo system (outside of the Virtual Boy) - and you're not interested in the GamePad, then there's no reason to get a Wii U. Nintendo's changed, you've changed, relationships change, couples grow apart and move on. Maybe it's time for you to move on.
Here's my justification for that analogy: Nintendo's response to those who don't like the pitifully low storage on the Wii U is to go out and buy your own HDD.
It also supports SD cards and you can get a 32 GB SD card for $20 if you shop around, and that should last you a whole.
I'm actually glad about this. Plug in a 32 GB SD card. Run out of space? Buy an external hard drive. Not enough cash for an expensive hard drive? buy a 32 GB USB drive. Easy peasy.
I don't get why they couldn't also offer a premium SKU which has an internal hard drive. I'm not saying they shouldn't offer the 8gb flash model, but why can't they do both? That's the way Microsoft has done things with their various Xbox 360 models, and apparently it must be working well for them. Why can't Nintendo do that?
I don't get why they couldn't also offer a premium SKU which has an internal hard drive. I'm not saying they shouldn't offer the 8gb flash model, but why can't they do both? That's the way Microsoft has done things with their various Xbox 360 models, and apparently it must be working well for them. Why can't Nintendo do that?
XBox 360 4 GB - $199
XBox 360 250 GB - $299
1 TB External Hard Drive from Newegg... $89.99 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148405)
So... do I spend $100 on a smaller hard drive that I can't use on anything else ever... or spend less on a hard drive that's more than four times the size that I can use on any PC ever?
Honestly, people talk as if all "casual" gamers can't walk and chew gum at the same time.
XBox 360 4 GB - $199
XBox 360 250 GB - $299
1 TB External Hard Drive from Newegg... $89.99 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148405)
So... do I spend $100 on a smaller hard drive that I can't use on anything else ever... or spend less on a hard drive that's more than four times the size that I can use on any PC ever?
The 250 gb comes with a headset, and it seems there are only bundles now for the 250 gb. Either Forza 4 with a steering wheel or the two game holiday bundle. All for $299, and they let you use an external hardrive. But don't let that cloud your vision, obviously the harddive is overpriced because that other crap adds $0 value.
Also, why are you so focused on the 360? PS3 uses 2.5" hard drives, why can't the Wii-U? I mean Microsoft is the only proprietary drive on the market and we are acting like this is a big win?
I also like it how you've gone from I never tell people what to buy to telling everyone the Wii-U is not for them. We are all Nintendo fans here or we wouldn't use this site. No reason to get bitter because people are passionate.
The 250 gb comes with a headset, and it seems there are only bundles now for the 250 gb. Either Forza 4 with a steering wheel or the two game holiday bundle. All for $299, and they let you use an external hardrive. But don't let that cloud your vision, obviously the harddive is overpriced because that other crap adds $0 value.
Also, why are you so focused on the 360?Because some folks keep bringing up the 360 in comparison...
PS3 uses 2.5" hard drives, why can't the Wii-U?Wait... Casual players are so stupid they won't understand external memory, but now we expect them to dissect their system and install a hard drive?
I also like it how you've gone from I never tell people what to buy to telling everyone the Wii-U is not for them.Anyone who says "I want the Wii U to fail" has already decided the Wii U is not for them.
Of course, they can. However, I think it's better to approach them by pretending that they can't.
The 250 gb comes with a headset, and it seems there are only bundles now for the 250 gb. Either Forza 4 with a steering wheel or the two game holiday bundle. All for $299, and they let you use an external hardrive.
Anyone who says "I want the Wii U to fail" has already decided the Wii U is not for them.
Anyone who says "I want the Wii U to fail" has already decided the Wii U is not for them.
Considering I'm the person you were originally talking to when you said "the Wii is not for you", I'm really curious when I've used the phrase "I want the Wii U to fail". I've seen a few other posters use that phrase in regards to Nintendo learning humility (a sentiment I can sympathize with), but I don't believe I've ever said that.
For this all Nintendo needs is enough space to get people to use the service and like the service. Once they run out of space if they like the services provided they need to make a choice: Space Management or spending money for an external drive for more digital content that you just plug in.Honestly, people talk as if all "casual" gamers can't walk and chew gum at the same time.
Actually, I think people are just cheap and lazy. $90 would certainly fix the issue by picking up an external hard drive. But my entertainment stand is already cluttered and has plugs everywhere so why add an hd and a wii-u? I'd probably not buy DL games rather than buy an external hard drive, unless there was a killer ap I felt I needed. And thus, I think by having a bigger DL solution up front, Nintendo could encourage people to purchase DLC and thus they would make their money back ten fold on whatever the HD costs since DLC typically has big margins.
$90 start up cost for downloadable games is a deterrent to me. $5-15 that they typically cost is not. Plus early adopters are already getting screwed with all the other stuff you have to buy on top of the console that you're just adding one more thing.
If Nintendo can bring the must-buy software, I can tolerate their gimmicky hardware issues. So far, they just haven't.
As it stands I'm pretty confident the Wii U will be $350 at launch. With an internal hard drive or SSD, that would be up to at least $400. This is a compromise on Nintendo's part to keep the price as low as they can.
As it stands I'm pretty confident the Wii U will be $350 at launch. With an internal hard drive or SSD, that would be up to at least $400. This is a compromise on Nintendo's part to keep the price as low as they can.
There are those who would pay $50 or $100 more for a premium SKU that includes a HDD and maybe one or two other extras. The 8gb model might be fine for the mass market, but I don't see the harm if Nintendo offered an optional "elite" version for those who demand it. Again, its worked out well for the Xbox 360.
And its not like Nintendo themselves have never done something like this before, because the original NES had multiple SKUs with one being the basic thing and another having Duck Hunt and a light gun, and another "premium" version that included that plus ROB and his game.
The 8GB model could be marketed to casuals and come with NintendoLand as its pack in, but for $50 or $100 more they could offer one which includes a HDD, NSMB U, and perhaps one of those optional game pads. They could also give it a different color, like perhaps red.
Casual consumers are too confused by external storage, but offering them multiple SKUs isn't too confusing?
So... you want Nintendo to take advantage of consumer ignorance?
So... Nintendo should prey on consumer ignorance before other companies do it?
They'd also have to redesign the system to accomodate the drive bay, which would further increase the cost.Nintendo wouldn't have had to redesign anything if they designed the console with the hard drive bay in the first place. Gamecube had like 3 extra ports on the bottom. I don't think (and am too lazy to check if) Nintendo had to pay licensing fees for them, but it was nice that they were there. If I remember correctly, 1 of them was never used with any officially released peripheral.
Forza 4 (assuming that you *want* it) - $45 on Amazon.
Offical 360 Headset (Wii U does voice chat without a headset, but okay) - $7.29 on Amazon.
So... $47.21 for the 250 GB Hard Drive...
500 GB Hard Drive on Amazon.com... $47.73 (http://www.amazon.com/Maxtor-OneTouch-Desktop-External-STM305004OTA3E1-RK/dp/B000V4PZFU/ref=sr_1_3?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1339288702&sr=1-3)
Fifty-Two cents, I get twice the memory and a hard drive I can use on whatever PC I want.
Wait... Casual players are so stupid they won't understand external memory, but now we expect them to dissect their system and install a hard drive?
Anyone who says "I want the Wii U to fail" has already decided the Wii U is not for them.I also did not say I want the Wii U to fail. I'm hoping Nintendo gives me a reason to purchase it, but I haven't seen it yet. But really, some people think that this is a big deal and some don't. It's all opinion based and it's just one thing Nintendo has bet on with the Wii-U. I just don't see the point in responding to every who disagrees with you on this point with "The Wii-U is not for You!"
Of course, they can. However, I think it's better to approach them by pretending that they can't.
If Nintendo should approach groups of consumers based on poor stereotypes of the most vocal within that group, then Nintendo should just assume that all hardcore gamers are whiny twits that will never be happy with Nintendo no matter what, so why bother doing anything for them anyway?
Xbox 360 320GB hard drive 129.99 at walmart (http://www.walmart.com/ip/Xbox-360-320GB-Hard-Drive-Xbox-360-Xbox-360/19276352) for the same price you can pick up a USB 3.0 2TB hard drive at walmart (http://www.walmart.com/ip/Hard-Drive-Enclosures/15215026). So for the same price I could pick up 6 times more space for my Wii-U. I'll stick to non-proprietary hard drives. :cool;
Casual consumers are too confused by external storage, but offering them multiple SKUs isn't too confusing?
Do you KNOW how many customers asked what the difference between the black and white Wii systems was? :D
As it stands I'm pretty confident the Wii U will be $350 at launch. With an internal hard drive or SSD, that would be up to at least $400. This is a compromise on Nintendo's part to keep the price as low as they can.
7 years is not a decade. 10 years is a decade. Over a decade means over 10 years. Learn English. You realize that Nintendo markets to different audiences. One audience wouldn't really care for that a lot of memory on a game system, remember the 4GB 360 model? If you care so much about storage, just buy a harddrive yourself instead of asking Nintendo to overprice the Wii U because you wanted them to add an HDD.
And the steering wheel? Personally, 250 gb is enough for me and I'd rather have the built in option.
The bundle has been on sale often for $50 off so if the $47.73 that you're paying for the hard drive is a hold up, wait a few months and you won't be.
Also, the point is they give you the option. And since you're so technical, you can buy an adapter and use the any existing hard drive you have laying around.
I never said casual players are stupid. I said they're lazy and don't want a bunch of cords laying around. I think a built in option or at least a bay makes this significantly better.
I also did not say I want the Wii U to fail.[...] I just don't see the point in responding to every who disagrees with you on this point with "The Wii-U is not for You!"
They should bother because the hardcore gamers spend lots of money. They are whiney, but like Ian said earlier, Nintendo has really pushed that group away in the past. I don't think their going to get mulligans on decisions until they show they are bringing something significant to the table.
And the black Wii wasn't out too long before they removed Gamecube compatibility.
Knowing changes can occur and asking about them doesn't seem to be ignorant to me. Especially for people that don't go to gaming sites.
Plus, being cheap isn't always a good thing in the eye of the consumer. N64 lost to the PS1 largely due to the stupid cartridge decision.
I was in college at the time the Gamecube was out and you have no idea how many people viewed it as inferior to the PS2.
We'll never know, but most people think you get what you pay for and always being the cheapest make people think Nintendo develops cheap toys.
This is another reason I like built ins. While it may not always be a deal at MSRP, it'll go on sale for significantly less later.
There is no official way that I'm aware of to use "any existing hard drive" with the 360. Unofficial ways could end up getting your console banned from XBox Live.I heard that the Slim model accepts 2.5" hard drives which are housed in this really chintzy "shell." You can just take out the hard drive and put any 2.5" hard drive you want in the shell as long as you formatted the new hard drive first. Apparently, you don't even really need the shell as long as you're okay with the hard drive "hovering" since the drive bay/dock is shaped like the shell. I wasn't aware that you got banned from Xbox Live for not using a 1st party hard drive. I'm not saying you're wrong. Far from it as I don't own a 360 and never tried it; I'm not sure either way.
http://forums.xbox.com/xbox_forums/xbox_support/f/7/p/192927/1005001.aspx (http://forums.xbox.com/xbox_forums/xbox_support/f/7/p/192927/1005001.aspx)Oh, that. I remember reading about that before. I always thought that was specifically for mods and cheat devices. It does say (among other things) that they may "cancel your account and your ability to access the Service" which is just ambiguous enough to cover their asses. Didn't Microsoft also ban some chick for identifying as a lesbian on Xbox Live (only to later say it was a "mistake")? Microsoft's policies don't seem terribly black and white. I wonder how many people got banned for using their own formatted hard drive with no game mods or pirated data, meaning for all intents and purposes it was just being used as a hard drive. I wonder how often Microsoft specifically checks if their users' hard drives are 1st party, if at all.
Official answer from the official XBox 360 forums, as recent as this Jan.
tl;dr version - Using unauthorized hardware/software with your 360 may result an a ban from XBox live. There are no authorized third-party 360 Hard Drives.
As I've said elsewhere, Nintendo could bundle in an SD card
almost all thumb drives come preformatted.
people saying that Nintendo can't win against the PS3 and 360 because Nintendo won't unnecessarily price their console too high...
There are definitely people who are too stupid or lazy to set up their own hard drive. I'd bet there isn't a ton of crossover between that demographic and the one that will have much interest in buying a lot of eShop stuff, though. This is a risk on Nintendo's part, but a calculated one.I definitely agree with this. I suppose Nintendo's thinking is that if people really want a hard drive, they'll get one. Hopefully, 3rd parties feel the same way and won't be apprehensive about supporting the platform. Still, this is the same reason why I think additional hard drive options, while technically more complicated, wouldn't be a problem per se. It just gives people more options.
...More options = Complication and Complication = More Variables and More Variables = More Cost. Programming wise adding in another place to add storage makes things more complicated. Which in the short and long term will cost more for Nintendo.
Still, this is the same reason why I think additional hard drive options, while technically more complicated, wouldn't be a problem per se. It just gives people more options.
I don't really know what you're saying here. I've admitted on a number of occasions that more options is more complicated by definition. You even quoted me saying so. What is this? I don't even... Are you saying that Nintendo should limit options because it costs them more not to? If so, fine. However, a lot of things increase cost, but that doesn't mean they can't be beneficial.I was just using you as a jumping off point. It really boils down to that Nintendo has found this to be the optimal point for cost vs benefit in this case. Which I agree with.
Its hard to find anyone over the age of 2 that can't plug in something to a USB port with minimal instructions
I'll bet you I could even get that guy the ability to plug in a USB plug to a USB port.Its hard to find anyone over the age of 2 that can't plug in something to a USB port with minimal instructions
http://www.hark.com/clips/dbyhvsvjpw-what-is-a-paperclip (http://www.hark.com/clips/dbyhvsvjpw-what-is-a-paperclip)
First, smallsharkbigbite... did you really just quadruple post?
8GB is more than enough for most people and I'd rather have the removable memory option.
I really don't get the connection between being lazy and not wanting cords laying around.I see the only viable solution as having a usb hard drive, which requires 2 additional cables (to Wii and to Power) and addtional space on the shelf. I don't see that as a good thing.
Also, I disagree with your idea that they don't want cords laying around. How many times has the complaint came up about the Wii and Wii U not having a network jack/being WiFi only? If people don't like cords, then this should be a good thing.
Remember Twilight Princess? It was the hardcore, super realistic Zelda that "everyone" wanted after Wind Waker... Yet the sales didn't touch Wind Waker's performance.Ignoring Wii sales to make a point?
If you consider two full years "not too long", then sure.The point is almost all electronic devices have multiple versions and some changes within the versions. I don't think it adds consumer confusion to have multiple versions because if you buy anything you're used to it by now.
errrr... Carts weren't "cheap". In fact, they increased costs for the system and the games in comparison to a CD reader/discs.Yeah, my point was storage lost the N64 war. Nintendo's response wasn't let's fix the storage issue, as all of the next consoles they've made have had gimped storage. The focus on being cheap now instead of matching standard features. When a console is cheaper, people wonder why. And when the answer is they cut standard features, they aren't impressed.
Such hypocrisy.
I find it highly ironic that cartridges on home consoles are deemed as archaic due to their expensiveness and complexity, yet they are still being used widely on mobile devices.
Heck, even Sony dropped the PSP's disc media and switched to carts for the Vita.
So it's ok for handhelds to use carts, yet on consoles it's a big no-no? Such hypocrisy.
The flash memory cards used in current handhelds are not the same thing as old-school cartridges.
I fell into your misdirect though. Whether you feel Microsoft gouges customers is irrelevant. Nintendo doesn't follow the competition in other areas so
This is where I strongly disagree with you. You are basing your info off of two gimped online systems (Wii and 3DS). The PS2 had 20% of it's users get online, 360 has about 60%,
1. Exclusive games: NBA Jam onfire edition is 900 mb and reasonably priced. Tons more games like this, some bigger. If you're online and that's the only way to get the game, don't know why you'd pass up good games.
2. Game patches. GT5 has like 3 gb of patches. Yeah, it'd be nice if they shipped a complete game, but they've added a bunch to this game. And basically every game I put in my ps3 has some patch to update the game and most of them are sizely.
3. Demos/other online things. If you're online and it's free, why not download? Demo's and videos online can be several gigs in size.
For comparison sake, I have about 10 WiiWare games and about 50 vc games downloaded for a total size of about 1 gb. On my PS3, I have not downloaded a full retail game. I have about 30 games, patches, and save files come to about 65 gb.
I see the only viable solution as having a usb hard drive, which requires 2 additional cables (to Wii and to Power) and addtional space on the shelf. I don't see that as a good thing.
Ignoring Wii sales to make a point?
Yeah, my point was storage lost the N64 war. Nintendo's response wasn't let's fix the storage issue, as all of the next consoles they've made have had gimped storage....gimped proprietary storage... which likely cost more...
The focus on being cheap now instead of matching standard features. When a console is cheaper, people wonder why. And when the answer is they cut standard features, they aren't impressed.
What I'd like to see is a thread in 6 years and see if the people that say 8 gb is sufficient for them found that to be the case.
The flash memory cards used in current handhelds are not the same thing as old-school cartridges.
QFT. The old school cartridges were basically circuit boards, so they were a lot more expensive to manufacture. The newer stuff is just flash memory which is a lot different.
And as for why optical media isn't used in mobile devices I think that's pretty obvious. Optical drives require a lot more energy (meaning they drain batteries faster), take up more space, and can be screwed up by the device being jolted.
Because, as I said, at the capacity required for modern console games it would be much too expensive to outweigh the negative aspects of discs. 2 GB cards for 3DS games are one thing, but with PS3 and Wii U discs holding upwards of 25 GB, the sheer volume of optical media at far cheaper prices can't be beat.
Because, as I said, at the capacity required for modern console games it would be much too expensive to outweigh the negative aspects of discs. 2 GB cards for 3DS games are one thing, but with PS3 and Wii U discs holding upwards of 25 GB, the sheer volume of optical media at far cheaper prices can't be beat.
Then game developers shouldn't make their games that big. There are thousands of smaller games on PSN, Xbox Live, iOS, etc. Games don't have to be that big to be good.
In other words, "size doesn't matter".
Because, as I said, at the capacity required for modern console games it would be much too expensive to outweigh the negative aspects of discs. 2 GB cards for 3DS games are one thing, but with PS3 and Wii U discs holding upwards of 25 GB, the sheer volume of optical media at far cheaper prices can't be beat.
Then game developers shouldn't make their games that big. There are thousands of smaller games on PSN, Xbox Live, iOS, etc. Games don't have to be that big to be good.
In other words, "size doesn't matter".
Because, as I said, at the capacity required for modern console games it would be much too expensive to outweigh the negative aspects of discs. 2 GB cards for 3DS games are one thing, but with PS3 and Wii U discs holding upwards of 25 GB, the sheer volume of optical media at far cheaper prices can't be beat.
Then game developers shouldn't make their games that big. There are thousands of smaller games on PSN, Xbox Live, iOS, etc. Games don't have to be that big to be good.
In other words, "size doesn't matter".
Yes, because putting arbitrary limitations on development is a great way to attract support for your hardware.
And I was saying it would be much easier for console games to come on flash memory cards instead of fragile discs. There are 32 GB (and larger) cards, so it wouldn't be a huge problem.
Game systems already come with internal flash storage, so why not use that same type of storage for the game media? It's more reliable and faster than discs.
Game systems already come with internal flash storage, so why not use that same type of storage for the game media? It's more reliable and faster than discs.This has already been answered. It's more expensive. Flash memory will always be more expensive than disc because it costs more to make them.
Also, homebrew on the Wii could support NTFS, so I hope Nintendo can work something out in that regard.
Nintendo could do everything they've done, and much more, they just choose not to.
Because, as I said, at the capacity required for modern console games it would be much too expensive to outweigh the negative aspects of discs.
As has been pointed out numerous times, artificially restricting developers for no reason is probably the stupidest thing Nintendo could do if they're trying to improve third party relations.
As has been pointed out numerous times, artificially restricting developers for no reason is probably the stupidest thing Nintendo could do if they're trying to improve third party relations.
It worked for Apple and Google.
As has been pointed out numerous times, artificially restricting developers for no reason is probably the stupidest thing Nintendo could do if they're trying to improve third party relations.
It worked for Apple and Google.
If you can't understand that Nintendo faces a different situation than the freaking smartphone platforms then you're beyond hopeless.
As far as I know there isn't a mandated size limit on the iOS App Store, and I don't think there's currently one on XBLA, although there used to be. Current systems aren't necessarily limited by the capacity of their physical media, as games can be expanded to multiple discs. It's the restriction that's the problem; telling developers they can't do something with no good reason to back it up is not the way to win third party support.
As far as I know there isn't a mandated size limit on the iOS App Store, and I don't think there's currently one on XBLA, although there used to be. Current systems aren't necessarily limited by the capacity of their physical media, as games can be expanded to multiple discs. It's the restriction that's the problem; telling developers they can't do something with no good reason to back it up is not the way to win third party support.
I thought XBLA always had a 1 GB size limit? I remember the original limit was 50 MB, but Microsoft expanded that a few years ago.
It doesn't matter what Google or Apple have done. Nintendo has done the "we'll tell you how to do this or that" routine with third parties before and it got them NOWHERE. "You will use cartridges. You will not make online games. You will use glorified last gen hardware with motion control." And third parties just said "screw you, we'll make our games on the other systems that don't tell us how to make OUR games." This isn't some hypothetical speculation, it's real life history. They did exactly this before and we've seen the results.
As far as I know there isn't a mandated size limit on the iOS App Store
If indie developers are ok with making small games, then why can't bigger publishers be satisfied with making small games?
It doesn't matter what Google or Apple have done. Nintendo has done the "we'll tell you how to do this or that" routine with third parties before and it got them NOWHERE. "You will use cartridges. You will not make online games. You will use glorified last gen hardware with motion control." And third parties just said "screw you, we'll make our games on the other systems that don't tell us how to make OUR games." This isn't some hypothetical speculation, it's real life history. They did exactly this before and we've seen the results.
It was literally the least they could've done. Allowing a 3rd party to make the adapter would've been zero support.Allowing 3rd parties to make the adapter would have been the least. Nintendo not having any expansion ports at all would have been absolute Zero.
If indie developers are ok with making small games, then why can't bigger publishers be satisfied with making small games?
Because consumers won't spend $60 on a game that isn't huge.
I can guess by your avatar that you are content with simple old school games that can fit on a 3.5 inch floppy, but most consumers demand more these days.
Big developers want to sell games at $60 and not 99cents I think was his point.
By that token, not all iOS games are 99cents. I see what you're saying, but $60 is the baseline price for HD games these days, which is why that number was used.
God of War Collection, Ico+Shadow of the Col., Okami, and others were all released at $40. Okami is releasing at $20.
EDIT: I meant re-releases, sorry.