Hackers Discover Wii U's Processor Design and Clock Speed 173
MojoKid writes "Early, off-the-record comments from game developers indicated that the Nintendo's Wii U console horsepower was on par with, or a bit behind the Xbox 360 and PS3, which raised questions about just how 'next-generation' the Wii U would be. Now, Wii and PS3 hacker Hector Martin (aka Marcan) has answered some of these questions and raised a few others. According to his findings, the Wii U's CPU is a triple-core design clocked at 1.24GHz. Marcan identifies the base design as a PowerPC 750, which makes sense. Nintendo used PowerPC 750-derived processors in both the GameCube and the Wii. Retaining that architecture for the Wii U would simplify backwards compatibility and game development. Now factor in the GPU, which is reportedly clocked at 550MHz. Some have favored the Radeon HD 4000 series as a basis for the part; I still think a low-end Radeon 5000, like Redwood Pro, makes more sense. That GPU was built on 40nm, measured 104mm sq, clocked in at 649MHz, and had a 39W TDP. The die size discrepancy between the Wii U and Redwood Pro would account for the 32MB of EDRAM cache we know the Wii U offers. Nintendo may have propped up a relatively weak CPU with considerably more GPU horsepower."
Perhaps Horsepower No Longer Equals Next Gen? (Score:5, Insightful)
Early, off-the-record comments from game developers indicated that the Nintendo's Wii U console horsepower was on par with, or a bit behind the Xbox 360 and PS3, which raised questions about just how 'next-generation' the Wii U would be.
The other possibility is that the consoles experience diminishing returns past the horsepower the modern systems are at for most of the game developer's needs. After enjoying the Wii, the XBox 360 and the Playstation 3, I'm more concerned about the media type they select for the discs as swapping three DVDs to play one game on the XBox 360 is unacceptable when it fits on one PS3 disc. For the love of Zelda, I suspect that popping an SSD into an XBox 360 and running everything from that and forgetting the optical drive would make everything faster (and, yes, I know you then would only be able to do that with downloaded games linked to your profile and not the installed discs that require a disc in the drive to run).
Nintendo may have propped up a relatively weak CPU with considerably more GPU horsepower.
Like the reader comment on that Ars Technica article notes, raw CPU speed hasn't always equaled winning in the console department.
And, frankly, I'm a little disappointed that Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft haven't done a little innovating and created their own technology like SLI/Crossfire to connect several cheap GPUs for their heavy graphics lifting on their machines. I mean their CPU/GPU pairs make it look like we should really start addressing these things with a different name [arstechnica.net] just like RAM started being called cache when it was fast and nestled up against or integrated with the CPU. I guess I'm not really a hardware guy but I feel like we've actually moved toward less inventive ideas for consoles. While that's been good for some aspects (I was able to flash the security sector of a HDD and install it myself on my XBox 360 to add storage) it seems like the architecture has gotten lazy and inbred to just do whatever desktops are doing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The other possibility is that the consoles experience diminishing returns past the horsepower the modern systems are at for most of the game developer's needs. After enjoying the Wii, the XBox 360 and the Playstation 3, I'm more concerned about the media type they select for the discs as swapping three DVDs to play one game on the XBox 360 is unacceptable when it fits on one PS3 disc. For the love of Zelda, I suspect that popping an SSD into an XBox 360 and running everything from that and forgetting the optical drive would make everything faster (and, yes, I know you then would only be able to do that with downloaded games linked to your profile and not the installed discs that require a disc in the drive to run).
I don't see the console gaming industry going back to cartridges. They've had many generations enjoying absurdly cheap production costs on optical media.
Nintendo may have propped up a relatively weak CPU with considerably more GPU horsepower.
Like the reader comment on that Ars Technica article notes, raw CPU speed hasn't always equaled winning in the console department.
While true, the reality is that they're already behind the curve. How many games will be able to be ported from the other competing next generation systems without major refactoring and potentially reduced in features? Did Nintendo even tell their premiere 3rd party developers what to expect, or did they make them buy dev kits to find out how underpowered i
Re:Perhaps Horsepower No Longer Equals Next Gen? (Score:4, Informative)
I guess one could argue that you don't want a bunch of ports on your system, but most people can't afford to buy all the consoles and will choose whichever they can expect to get most of the games they want to play. This will, once again, turn into "and then there's the Nintendo port" that's a radically different game, since at that point it's cheaper to start fresh than adapt. And a lot of studios won't even bother, I suspect, leaving yet another Nintendo generation filled with shovelware and crap kid games that are dirt cheap to make because they're so bad.
Nintendo's games are actually much more popular than the FPS/MMORPG crap on other consoles and the PC. Not being able to port this garbage is probably a net plus – Nintendo is going for a completely different (and larger) demographic. There is more to life than young men in the 14-25 age bracket.
If the allegedly underpowered hardware of the Wii U offends you, congratulations – you're not the target audience.
Re: (Score:2)
If the allegedly underpowered hardware of the Wii U offends you, congratulations – you're not the target audience.
Offend is a pretty strong word, they can put out whatever kind of system they want, and good for them. It's their business, after all.
But, when a seven year old console sells better during your brand new console's launch week, business isn't necessarily booming [videogamer.com]. Financially, Nintendo isn't doing nearly as well as it did during the days when the Wii and the NDS hit the shelves, so I really do hope their decisions pay off for them. I just have to question the wisdom of it. Yeah yeah, aimchair entertainment em
Re: (Score:3)
But, when a seven year old console sells better during your brand new console's launch week
I haven't bothered to do the research, so I could be mistaken here, but is it possible that that is due to the normal launch-week unit shortages? Typically new consoles almost immediately sell out the entirety of their first shipment.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't care about FPS or MMORPG either. I like strategy games, one-on-one fighters (Tekken, Street Fighter, etc..), and my kids like platformers and dance games. In any of those, does the Wii give me something the others don't besides cartoon graphics?
Re: (Score:3)
People have to understand the cycle of game genres.
1) When a new platform comes out, the early games take advantage of the new platform. They are cheap to make, and there are a few runaway hits.
2) After there's a few runaway hits, the big players copy those hits, and flesh them out a bit (with better stories, graphics, and artwork).
3) Eventually, the genre matures. You need AAA graphics. However, the hardcore players won't touch the game if it's too easy, and casual gamers won't play a game that's too hard,
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
The Wii U is not necessarily for the CoD people, but Nintendo execs have made many oblique statements (of course those are about the only kind of statements they make) that they need to capture the attention of the "core gamer" again, and that the Wii U is the answer to that problem.
As more and more casual gamers move to mobile apps for their fix, it is rather important to Nintendo's bottom line to do this. If the Wii U is seen as another outdated-on-arrival piece of hardware, I think it will not receive a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
While you're right, I still think Nintendo is missing something here by falling for the same false dichotomy that you've mentioned. IF they did make it powerful enough to run those types of games, that doesn't mean they couldn't also have their good old nintendo frontliners as well. That would almost immediately sway anyone who grew up on the SNES/N64 but enjoys console FPSes into their audience, as well as deprive sales to their competitors. I think they are mistakenly fearing direct competition with So
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
1/4 mile fiesta (Score:2)
It's funny that you used the Fiesta as your counterpoint; Ken Block [autoblog.com] doesn't seem to mind pitting his Fiesta against Porches in rallycross events. I think this strengthens your analogy - not every car is built for drag racing, you've got to use it for what it was intended.
Re: (Score:2)
What everybody seems to be ignoring is the target demographic for the wii U which is NOT the hardcore shooter crowd.
What exactly is their target audience? It's certainly not the casual crowd that they attracted with the Wii either, as Nintendo has shown basically nothing new in terms of motion controls, they don't even include a Wiimote in the Wii U package. So if it's neither the hardcore or the casual, who is it? All the hardcore Nintendo fans that haven't jumped ship yet?
Re: (Score:2)
Is this a weak CPU? Yep...
ROFLMAO. My first "real" computer had a CPU clocked at ~7mhz. The Wii U CPU only seems weak in comparison to what is currently available.
Re: (Score:3)
And, frankly, I'm a little disappointed that Sony ... haven't done a little innovating and created their own technology like SLI/Crossfire to connect several cheap GPUs for their heavy graphics lifting on their machines
The Cell processor (what that powers the Sony PS3) is a processor tech designed by Sony and if I remember right is meant to hook a whole bunch of fairly small GPU-like units (vector processors) together, usable for general programming rather than mostly graphics.
It's one of the reasons the PS3 cost so much, along with blu-ray. And the reason the cell processor cost so much is because Sony the R&D themselves instead buying off-the-shelf parts. If any of the console companies "does a little innovating"
Re: (Score:2)
.
Thus the expectation that next gen consoles will be mostly off-the-shelf parts. That's fine with me, so long as they equal the pe
Re: (Score:2)
Current "when"? In other words, can't some no name off brand PC maker always be ahead of a console, which needs standardized hardware (part of the point of having a console), and a long lead time to get games written for it?
Re: (Score:3)
The reality is most people do care about the games more than the processing power.
Re: (Score:2)
And, frankly, I'm a little disappointed that Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft haven't done a little innovating and created their own technology like SLI/Crossfire to connect several cheap GPUs for their heavy graphics lifting on their machines.
Ugh, my mind reels at the memory of the N64 Memory Pak.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The other possibility is that the consoles experience diminishing returns past the horsepower the modern systems are at for most of the game developer's needs.
A more realistic way of putting it, is that Nintendo designed a system that fit their own needs, and 3rd party developers will just have to work with it. Take a look at the games Nintendo has typically made for the Gamecube and Wii, and it's pretty obvious that lots of CPU power for game logic isn't a requirement.
I guess I'm not really a hardware guy but I feel like we've actually moved toward less inventive ideas for consoles
What about the PS3 Cell? Oh, well, it's so different from traditional CPUs that all developers do is whine and bitch about how different it is, and how their x86 PC code runs like crap without *g
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not a console user by any stretch of the imagination but some people prefer not to have a moving target for gaming. A single low-cost investment + games is preferable to many people than what us PC users deal with.
It hasn't been too bad with games generally being designed for consoles first keeping PC requirements down, but that's not always the case.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft assuredly wants to sell you hard drives. Don't get the 4gb model, I spent almost as much time deleting saves for Skyrim as I did playing Skyrim.
Re: (Score:2)
More to the poi
You are not Nintendo's target market (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You are not Nintendo's target market (Score:4, Insightful)
the hardcore bleeding edge gamers I know build their own PC for > $3K
Re: (Score:2)
All the ones I know abandoned PC gaming and are 100% console gaming. there is far more victims on the Multiplayer console games to teabag and torment.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, but no one serious about playing any kind of FPS will move from a PC to a console. The mouse is an exponentially better precision device than a controller.
Keyboard-mouse is inferior and outdated. (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Pansies. I use three mice. Unlimited turning speed, unlimited movement, and unlimited firing rate!!!1!
Re: (Score:2)
There's no good reason why the PS3 and XBox360 don't support playing these games with a mouse. They both are entirely capable of it from a technical standpoint.
Re: (Score:2)
It is a competitive advantage issue, and is intentionally prevented by console makers. One of the console makers did a study on it a while back, and allowing mice would have such an impact that people would either have to be segregated by input device or FPS players would have to buy a mouse to compete on an equal level. There are hardhacked mice for consoles that appear to the console as a controller, and its actually considered cheating.
Re: (Score:2)
"It is a competitive advantage issue, and is intentionally prevented by Microsoft."
FTFY, as I can use keyboard and mouse with my PS3. It's the game devs that have to support it.
Re: (Score:2)
"The mouse is an exponentially better precision device than a controller."
And it works just fine on the PS3 with UT3.
Oh, I'm sorry, did I just blow your point away?
Ditto Unreal Championship on the DREAMCAST.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hah, I think what he was referring to is how there's some hardhacked mice that appear as a controller to the console. They are not allowed by the consoles due to competitive advantage, so in this sense its definitely cheating. Google "xbox 360 mouse" for me info.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry but this isn't accurate. Twitch responses with a mouse require less mucle and less movement, making the task quicker, while maintaining the precision of the lower portion of our arm, the most well controlled part of our body. The guntrollers use a lot more muscles and are a lot more involved, so while they and controllers are easier to learn and master and in many cases more fun to many, their ceiling is lower than a mouse. Also, a lot of console gamers buy computer monitors and play at a desk beca
Re: (Score:2)
It will not be faster. Moving a controller many inches is not going to be faster than me moving the mouse a half inch or so.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't understand the hardware before you post, apparently.
In the case of Wii/U, that 5 degree rotation might only go a couple of inches or might spin you around in a circle 5 full times.
How far are you from that sensor bar and console will be the ultimate determining factor as to how far that little movement goes.
I can do almost 6 full rotations moving my mouse an inch and a half. I use only my fingers to move the mouse, and the speed and precision I have would blow your mind.
Re: (Score:2)
As someone who completely swore off traditional console controllers for FPS games moments after first using the wiimote, I would say that the mouse is still exponentially better than any console controller.
It's just with the wiimote it's a binary order of magnitude instead of decimal. :)
Re: (Score:2)
The post I responded to was referring to the bleeding edge, not what was more convenient. I took that to mean people interested in competitive play and derive enjoyment from difficulty. At that level, play with mice is completely different and far more exhilarating than that of a controller, and that's what this refers to. I'm not saying console gaming is bad or anything, to each their own, but as someone whose played at that level with a mouse on PC and then with a controller, the competitive side of co
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My circle of friends is mostly moving back to PC gaming after several years of being console-only.
How often do they visit bringing their PCs for a LAN party? Or do you play online mostly?
Re: (Score:2)
Anecdotes are not data.
Sure they are! Just not a lot of data. All we need now is for you two to rigorously define the number of friends and their movements, and then get a couple hundred more people randomly sampled from the population to do the same and we'll have the basis for a solid study!
Re:You are not Nintendo's target market (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
About the whole "Games used to be HARD" comment... It quickly reminded me of this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1ZtBCpo0eU [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Nintendo has been around for over a hundred years. Don't think so lightly of them, else you make yourself look even more like the fool you're currently presenting.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even still it seems like they are pushing it here. They aren't going to sucker so many non-gamers this time.
Re: (Score:2)
What really struck me as odd is that you pay 100 euro's more for a system that produces the same kind of visuals (maybe with less performance) then a xbox 360 or PS3. The WiiU totally doesn'
Re: (Score:3)
Nintendo's target market is young, and casual gamers.
The Wii was also very popular with older gamers as well – some of whom were people who grew up with Nintendo franchises like Mario and Zelda, and some of whom had no video game experience at all but enjoyed simple activities like Wii Fit.
Take a look at this Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] on video game sales figures: the best-selling Wii games are far outselling the top Xbox 360 and PS3 titles.
The truth is that FPSes and MMORPGs are actually a relatively niche
I always considered nextgen as (Score:2)
new things for game play that were not possible in the last gen consoles and I'm not talking about "Real Life Graphics"
Thin clients going in the same direction. (Score:1)
Weak CPU alongside a decent GPU does work relatively well, so long as whatever program you're using utilizes the GPU.
Never really been about horsepower (Score:5, Interesting)
Nintendo will get my money purely because of their software; mario (inc paper mario series), zelda, metroid, pikmin, pokemon and a dozen other's that were purely first or second party exclusives. The vast majority of x-box and ps3 games I can play with much better graphics on my pc. The x-box and ps3 don't really offer anything beyond what a pc is capable of, where as Nintendo consoles do.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe OT, but please don't forget that the PS3 can also be used as an excellent BluRay, DVD, SACD and SACD-R player. Although I'm not a gamer, I would buy it if I could afford it.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe OT, but please don't forget that the PS3 can also be used as an excellent BluRay, DVD, SACD and SACD-R player. Although I'm not a gamer, I would buy it if I could afford it.
SACD playback in the PS3 was dropped at he same time PS2 compatibility was dropped.
Re: (Score:2)
So can a $50 BluRay player.
Re:Never really been about horsepower (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
a bunch of obsolete stuff involving optical disks, which people did 10-15 years ago before hard disks got big enough
So how do you get the movie from the studio to your hard disk, especially when a satellite ISP is still offering a cap of one single-layer BD a month as its best plan [exede.com]?
Re:Never really been about horsepower (Score:4, Insightful)
This is why I bought a Wii U. I can already play 90% of 360 and PS3 games on my gaming PC (and they will look nicer to boot, have modding abilities, etc.), but I can't play Nintendo's exclusives anywhere else. When I considered it that way, it was a no-brainer.
Re: (Score:3)
Seconded. I am a very occasional/casual game player myself, and I've never really been a huge fan of the FPS genre. When I was a kid growing up, I always loved mario and zelda. If I wanted to play games with better graphics, I would buy myself a better video card and use my PC. Now that I'm 35 and can afford it, I mosty just don't bother.
Re: (Score:2)
you want me to pay for a 40nm chip in 2012? (Score:3)
really?
nintendo should have put more hardware into the actual console and not used that tablet thingy they ship with it. just write an android/IOS app to run on the cheapest tablets and connect to the console like MS is doing with Smartglass.
Re:you want me to pay for a 40nm chip in 2012? (Score:4, Insightful)
You mean that they should have made exactly the same console that their competitors will make, and therefore have absolutely no distinguishing characteristic of their own? (And, in fact, just compound the fact that they are behind in their online setup?) Nintendo learned that that strategy didn't work very well with GameCube.
And do you understand that you cannot just send console-generated video to a regular tablet without incurring lots of latency? Might be okay for some games, but definitely not for anything fast action. If you want the tablet to generate the video, then the cheapest ones will not generate much that looks so good. And who wants to try and develop an app that works across all the varieties of tablets out there? Do you have any idea how big that compatibility matrix is?
OnLive; buttons (Score:2)
And who wants to try and develop an app [for game graphics display] that works across all the varieties of tablets out there?
Someone like OnLive perhaps?
Do you have any idea how big that compatibility matrix is?
Let's see: there's iOS and Android, and what else really? The advantage of the Wii U GamePad is that it also incorporates traditional physical buttons, unlike everything that isn't the Xperia Play (or the forthcoming Archos GamePad).
Re: (Score:2)
> Let's see: there's iOS and Android, and what else really?
You're not a developer, I see. You need to multiply all the commonly-used versions of iOS and Android by all the different base hardware platforms, then figure out other factors such as screen size & density and platform-specific quirks. Compound that by the fact that new OS versions and new hardware platforms come out every month, and you've got quite an impressive matrix, assuming you care about supporting them well.
Start with the most popular devices (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's worth pointing out that Nintendo didn't have a "real" Mario game on the Gamecube. They came out with Mario Sunshine which was... not really Mario.
Much like what happened to Sega with the Saturn, it's kind of hard to sell a console without your star characters front and center.
Re: (Score:3)
Er what? The GameCube wasn't as powerful as the Xbox, but it was more powerful than the Playstation 2.
I have a few games on both the Cube and the PS2, and in each case the Cube version looks better and runs smoother.
Re:you want me to pay for a 40nm chip in 2012? (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is latency. It's incredibly difficult, but the Wii U's screen latency on the tablet is practically real time (I think I heard 1 frame latency). So much so that yes, you CAN game on it.
The latency using your smartphone is much higher - it's why smartglass and such don't display in-game information that changes immediately but can tolerate a delay. You certainly can't "remote play" using your smartphone without incurring a half-second of display lag.
Indeed (Score:2)
The Wii U seems intresting but consoles have to last half a decade. In 5 years, this thing will be so obsolete it just won't be funny anymore. Lets not forget that Nintendo started losing money because their GAME sales per console are low. They do sell a LOT of consoles but fewer games per console then their competitors. And consoles are like printers, the real money is the ink/games.
The problem is that the rest of the industry is moving on, I have seen multiple reviews by xbox friendly gaming sites that
Re: (Score:2)
intendo should have put more hardware into the actual console and not used that tablet thingy they ship with it.
That tablet thingy has actual physical controls. Thumbsticks, d-pads, actual buttons...
Trading that for an android app that will run on the 'cheapest tablets' would deliver a pretty lousy user experience and then what? It wouldn't be included with the system either, so most people would have to buy a tablet...?
So developers, including nintendo wouldn't be able to assume you had one, so games could
Strange (Score:5, Insightful)
I always thought, playing was about fun and not horsepower. Maybe the incapability to distinguish between those two explains a lot about what happens on the streets ;-).
Re:Strange (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, just the other day I was out on da streets minding my own business and suddenly a harras (had to look that one up) of horses sporting butterfly knives come out of nowhere and takes all my valuables with threats to my person.
When will this horsepower on the streets ever stop?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose we should all go back to Atari 2600s again?
Re: (Score:2)
I always thought, playing was about fun and not horsepower.
Have you upgraded your pong machine yet? 'cause horsepower can make quite a bit of difference in the kind of fun games you can produce.
Re: (Score:2)
I was making a fun about the concentration on pure horsepower. Of course horesepower matters (a 0 hp car is surely now fun), but it isn't the most critical thing. Usually you get the best experience by balancing things out. To my experience, Nintendo is good at balancing.
I am a PC gamer by heart, but surely my WII is a hell lot of fun with just a fraction of the horsepower of my PC.
No legit indie scene is part of it (Score:2)
And for most major console developers, fun is third
That isn't likely to change soon, given how Nintendo refuses to open up development on its platform even to the extent that Microsoft opened Xbox 360 to Indie Games.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft's move in that avenue was about promoting their XNA framework to a new generation of budding developers, and being able to let them cross-build for Windows mobile, and -- way in the future -- be their fully featured .NET (managed code) replacement for DirectX (native code). It also serves as a cross promotional situation with Visual Studio Express, and is all part of their global marketing strategy in keeping their platforms relevant into the future.
Nintendo doesn't have that kind of bread-and-but
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, Nintendo was actually the original "evil empire" to home users [wikipedia.org], bringing what had once been a 1960s IBM mainframe problem to the consumer world: "what do you mean I'm not allowed to do whatever I want with my own computer?" The NES is the spiritual grandfather of the XBox and iPhone. It was a long time ago, so most of us have stopped hating Nintendo; there are more threatening, more in-your-face enemies out there today. But it's not like they ever stopped sucking.
And yet, even with that and my us
Re: (Score:2)
You do know the reason behind that, right? How before Nintendo laying down the law, pretty much any company could make a game for any system. This lead to a flood of crappy games drowning out any actually decent games on the market place. This was a time where dog food companies [wikipedia.org] and drink mix manufacturers [wikipedia.org] were releasing games because they could and because it was the cool thing to do. This lead to a big crash [wikipedia.org] where game companies went out of business because no one wanted buy the massive amount of crap tha
Re: (Score:2)
There are two ways to look at the buyer's market which exists whenever there is extreme competition. Yes, your way is one of them. ;-)
And if you happen to be a professional game programmer or publisher, your way of looking at it is probably the best .. for you.
From the PoV of a game player, as well as from the PoV of an amateur or smalltime-pro game developer, it is undesirable for there to be barriers to entry. Reducing competition and the diversity&availability of software are seen a negative attrib
Re: (Score:2)
Which do you want to do that travelling, a 33hp engine or a 500hp engine?
Based on a very cursory google, the 33HP engine actually. 500HP on a motorcycle seems like it'd be rather dangerous.
Hardware can help define an experience, ignoring that is foolish.
And there is more to hardware than just the engine/CPU.
Be patient: It will get better, eventually. (Score:2)
it's not the cpu that counts (Score:4, Insightful)
Nintendo has never incorporated bleeding edge processors into their design, rather focusing on games and weird peripherals. It seems to have worked for them so far, so why change?
Re:it's not the cpu that counts (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, an ex-Nintendo developer even had a name for this philosophy of building hardware using non-bleeding edge components:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpei_Yokoi#Lateral_Thinking_with_Withered_Technology [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't really say that's always been true. The SNES and N64 were pretty advanced at the time of their release.
The ghz doesn't mean much (Score:2)
It's about the gamepad (Score:3)
As a new Wii-U owner, I'm pretty sure this console is super lots about the gamepad. To the point where I'm a bit worried that they've put so much effort into the porting of games that don't have a shiny interface pad. Nintendo has defined THEIR OWN SPACE again, and as before, they will have a hard time filling it.
The pad is pretty magnificent to look upon, and I'm pretty sure a decent amount of the launch price attempts to offset such a pricey addition.
The problem is: if you make a top shelf game for Xbox and Sony, porting it to the Wii-U will leave you with this big piece of underutilized or unused hardware. The less creative will just put their pause screen options there (possibly taking them from the main screen), but even the most creative will have to spend dev dollars to make use of the screen, or look like they don't care much about it. If you instead choose to make a game for the Wii-U, one that makes good use of the screen, you probably won't be able to put it anywhere else.
Nintendo like, ALWAYS does this. They basically assume that some of the best names in gaming (of which they are one) will gather together and support whatever their new hardware idea is, and work that into their design. But in practice, many of the big players aren't willing to gamble on that.
Summary: The pad is a huge part of this experience. Ninja Gaiden whatever isn't improved by the pad. If F-Zero WhateverX doesn't come out with an engine tweaking function on the pad, or the ability to rebalance shields or something, then the bad will be called a "gimmick" and then everyone will just talk about the Wii-U's CPU/GPU and other stuff it can't really compete on anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
NES had a regular controller. SNES had a regular controller. N64 only added an analog joystick, which everybody does now. The Wii changed to a remote control when everybody else was copying the n64 controller, and made obscene amounts of money with it, as everyone loved the novelty and had to have one. Sony and Microsoft eventually made something to compete, but Nintendo started it, and made lots of money from it.
Re: (Score:2)
But my phone or iPad don't have a controller buttons. It is also very difficult to use a controller and an iPad at the same time. This doesn't have that problem. Plus, developers know that I own one by sheer virtue that I own the console. Xbox Developers can't make that same assumption about whether I have a small phone, a large tablet, or neither.