topic.
It's hard to tell. It's definitely smart of Nintendo to stick to the Wii brand name, and upping the system's power to handle HD is definitely something that skeptics of the original Wii will take note of. The tablet controller, as I see it, is just an extension of the DS to a console. The good thing about that is that you've got all the basic, standard controller setup (control sticks, ABXY, triggers, etc) as well as the additional input of the touchscreen, and the obligatory motion controls. I'd say the Wii U could appeal to more people considering that it has the potential to not be just a wagglefest.
That, and it's Nintendo. It has a bunch of first party franchises not seen anywhere else. That's enough for everyone to be happy customers.
ITT: We make judgments about a console that we know almost nothing about.
I say it's Nintendo's last hurrah.
Then they're taking Shigeru, Satoru, and all the other fat cats behind then barn and shooting them.
Then they're unveiling their new big company.
COOLGAMESFORCOOLKIDS
Or COGSOCKS for short.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on January 07, 2012, 11:15:17 PM
ITT: We make judgments about a console that we know almost nothing about.
Pretty much.
But it's a Nintendo console. I doubt it wouldn't be successful, but I'm not expecting it to be on par with the Wii.
Quote from: Doodle on January 08, 2012, 11:13:56 AM
Pretty much.
But it's a Nintendo console. I doubt it wouldn't be successful, but I'm not expecting it to be on par with the Wii.
I agree.
The Wii got to be super popular because its main gimmick was that it was more interactive than just sitting on a couch and pressing buttons. This attracted a lot of young children and older people who wanted to use it as a way of exercising.
I don't foresee the drawing pad thing on the WiiU attracting such a wide range of people. Maybe little children might be into it but older generations probably won't care much for it.
It's a Nintendo console, though. It'll still sell.
not really
I'm playing the waiting game this time around.
Isn't it way too early to tell? We don't even know a whole lot of what it'll have.
But every Nintendo console has done well, why won't this one?
Quote from: Pennington on January 08, 2012, 03:35:34 PM
Isn't it way too early to tell? We don't even know a whole lot of what it'll have.
But every Nintendo console has done well, why won't this one?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_64DD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_boy
Quote from: The Riddler on January 08, 2012, 03:47:35 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_64DD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_boy
I meant real consoles, not gimmicks/extensions. WiiU is next in line after NES, SNES, N64, GCN, and Wii, all of which have done well.
The Virtual Boy wasn't a gimmick, it was supposed to be a companion to the Game Boy. Had they used a headstrap rather than a stand, it would have done better. Not as well as if it had been in full color, but that was too expensive.
Not enough is known about the Wii U. They need to improve their online systems a lot. It will still probably do very well.
Quote from: Tupin on January 08, 2012, 04:45:59 PM
The Virtual Boy wasn't a gimmick, it was supposed to be a companion to the Game Boy. Had they used a headstrap rather than a stand, it would have done better. Not as well as if it had been in full color, but that was too expensive.
Not enough is known about the Wii U. They need to improve their online systems a lot. It will still probably do very well.
Oh intercourse , I forgot all about the poop online.
Quote from: Pennington on January 09, 2012, 02:41:08 PM
Oh intercourse , I forgot all about the poop online.
Well, it got a lot better with 3DS, so it'll likely get better again with Wii U.
Depends on the launch price.
My opinion changed to "probably not." Why?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=35468866&postcount=10922
How did they manage to be stupid enough to start with a good design, but them end up making it worse? This has to be a first.
I don't see much of a difference, really. I'll get used to it regardless.
Quote from: NoiseHunterChris on February 26, 2012, 11:29:48 AM
I don't see much of a difference, really. I'll get used to it regardless.
The old one had analog sticks, grips on the sides, and the buttons and D-Pad in more usable positions. The one from E3 is worse in every way.
People are starting to talk about the Wii U. I mean, normal people that normally don't know what the intercourse is going on in the industry.
The tablet makes them think "omg futuristic".
I wouldn't be surprised if people really like the darn thing.
I can see the tablet/DS Stylus type of thing working better in games than the Wiimote ever did, at least in conceptual design of games. Traditional controls for us who like them with a touch screen/tablet to shake things up a bit or just be a general use map/item thing like the DS used at points.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on February 26, 2012, 11:53:27 AM
The old one had analog sticks, grips on the sides, and the buttons and D-Pad in more usable positions. The one from E3 is worse in every way.
Yeah, here's hoping it changes a bit again before E3.
I know the Wii remote changed a bit after the TGS it was revealed. Okay maybe I'm delusional.
Quote from: X-3 on February 27, 2012, 04:14:16 PM
Yeah, here's hoping it changes a bit again before E3. I know the Wii remote changed a bit after the TGS it was revealed. Okay maybe I'm delusional.
You're not delusional. The Wii Remote did change compared to the Revmote.
http://images.eurogamer.net/assets/articles/a/6/0/9/1/3/a_med_revcontroller.jpg
The GameCube controller went through several prototype designs as well. I expect both the console and the controller to look slightly different at E3 this year.
Also, for the record, I still trust the E3 impressions saying that it was comfortable.
I agree that there isn't enough known about the console yet. Aside from that fact, I think it'll do okay. As far as I can tell, it probably won't be a flop at least.
I miss the time where you could just hold a thing with buttons to play a console game. No arm-swinging motion controls or looking at a second screen in your lap every now and then.
Those were simpler days.
Quote from: Pennington on March 14, 2012, 11:50:47 AM
I miss the time where you could just hold a thing with buttons to play a console game. No arm-swinging motion controls or looking at a second screen in your lap every now and then.
Those were simpler days.
You should have bought more GameCubes, then. :p I guess you're not looking forward to this.
I've heard multiple devs praising the WiiU like mad. I don't have any specific quotes, but so far it's been very well-liked.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 14, 2012, 02:23:50 PM
You should have bought more GameCubes, then. :p I guess you're not looking forward to this.
I'll definitely get a Wii U (eventually), but I still hold my Gamecube near and dear to my heart.
I still need to know how they plan to appeal to core gamers this time around.
Smash Bros using a tablet is going to suck dick
We just need a Gamecube controller made specifically for the Wii U
I think they did that for Wii, but it wasn't really pushed
at this point more smash bros is just more characters, its time for a new crossover series
Quote from: Michio Kaku on March 14, 2012, 09:56:05 PM
I still need to know how they plan to appeal to core gamers this time around.
Smash Bros using a tablet is going to suck dick
I'm sure you'll at least be able to use a Classic Controller Pro in the worst case. The controller will probably be altered next time we see it as well.
Quote from: Silverhawk79 on March 14, 2012, 03:01:09 PM
I've heard multiple devs praising the WiiU like mad. I don't have any specific quotes, but so far it's been very well-liked.
Thing is, the same was said of the Wii. :/ Still good to hear, though.
I also heard a rumor that UE4 will run on Wii U (which is important for obvious reasons), but I personally doubt it, especially since Mark Rein seems to be trying to push UE3 on it so hard.
EDIT: It turns out that Microsoft doesn't have a console planned this year, so Nintendo t least has a year head-start going for it
I could probably get used to Smash on a CC Pro real quick, so I don't see that being a problem.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 15, 2012, 02:42:14 PM
EDIT: It turns out that Microsoft doesn't have a console planned this year, so Nintendo t least has a year head-start going for it
assuming we count the later sega consoles, the NES was the last console to both launch first and sell best in its generation.
Quote from: zephilicious on March 16, 2012, 01:48:12 PM
assuming we count the later sega consoles, the NES was the last console to both launch first and sell best in its generation.
So? I don't care about first place. A lead over the lasting competition has helped most of the time, however. Genesis stole quite a bit of market share from Nintendo if you compare NES and SNES sales; I don't even need to mention PS1 (which would have been the first of the generation is Sega didn't panic) and PS2 (and keep in mind that the Dreamcast was doomed before it even hit the market due to Sega's financial situation); 360's lead helped it to triple the sales of its predecessor and made XBox the new face of "hardcore" gaming; and let's be honest, Vita is never going to catch up with 3DS. Really, it seems more like Sega is the one to blame there. Wii seems to be the exception here, and that wasn't even competing with the other two consoles.
Well, forget I said anything. If the latest rumor about Wii U on NeoGAF is true, this thing is screwed. :/ (More than one controller is technically impossible without the console effectively becoming significantly weaker than current-gen consoles.)
I thought this was already known. the controllers would cost well over $100 each anyway
Quote from: zephilicious on March 18, 2012, 04:32:50 PM
I thought this was already known. the controllers would cost well over $100 each anyway
Not exactly. Nintendo said it at E3, but they didn't say that it was a technical limitation and there was a rumor later that that it was brought up to 2.
Also, the only reason the controller would cost more than $100 would be if Nintendo got greedy. $70-80 should be easily possible. It least, it better be, since this console will be the flop of century if it costs more than $300, and even at $300 it likely won't even reach GameCube sales.
... Granted, I predicted GameCube-level sales for 3DS, and I still can't get the taste of crow out of my mouth.
lol nintendo
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 18, 2012, 05:24:05 PM
Not exactly. Nintendo said it at E3, but they didn't say that it was a technical limitation and there was a rumor later that that it was brought up to 2.
Also, the only reason the controller would cost more than $100 would be if Nintendo got greedy. $70-80 should be easily possible. It least, it better be, since this console will be the flop of century if it costs more than $300, and even at $300 it likely won't even reach GameCube sales.
... Granted, I predicted GameCube-level sales for 3DS, and I still can't get the taste of crow out of my mouth.
$70-80 is still quite a load for just a controller, unless the console itself is only $130 to begin with. PFFFT AHAHAHA YEAH RIGHT
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 18, 2012, 05:24:05 PM
Also, the only reason the controller would cost more than $100 would be if Nintendo got greedy. $70-80 should be easily possible.
we're talking all of the technology in the existing wiimote ($40), plus most of the technology in a small tablet ($200)
Quote from: zephilicious on March 19, 2012, 12:31:58 PM
we're talking all of the technology in the existing wiimote ($40), plus most of the technology in a small tablet ($200)
The only thing it shares with a tablet is a screen, and even then it's low-res and resistive. It's nowhere near as advanced as the Kindle Fire. Besides that, there are $100 tablets, and the Wii Remote costs less than $10 to produce. It's more like Wii Remote Plus + 360 controller + a screen + whatever streaming tech they use. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you forgot that the controller can't stand on its own, since you'd have to be insane to think that Nintendo would bother with a controller that costs almost as much as a 3DS.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 19, 2012, 12:47:31 PM
The only thing it shares with a tablet is a screen, and even then it's low-res and resistive. It's nowhere near as advanced as the Kindle Fire. Besides that, there are $100 tablets, and the Wii Remote costs less than $10 to produce. It's more like Wii Remote Plus + 360 controller + a screen + whatever streaming tech they use. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you forgot that the controller can't stand on its own, since you'd have to be insane to think that Nintendo would bother with a controller that costs almost as much as a 3DS.
Funny how it "can't stand on its own", though it just may as well. From what's been shown, the Wii U doesn't even need to use the TV screen if it has the controllers.
Quote from: Pennington on March 19, 2012, 12:56:16 PM
Funny how it "can't stand on its own", though it just may as well. From what's been shown, the Wii U doesn't even need to use the TV screen if it has the controllers.
I don't get your point here.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 19, 2012, 12:58:19 PM
I don't get your point here.
It's becoming less like a controller and more like the entire focus of your gameplay.
Quote from: Pennington on March 19, 2012, 01:05:37 PM
It's becoming less like a controller and more like the entire focus of your gameplay.
Not really. Most of the time, you'll still use your TV. In fact, from what I've heard, some
ports are making extensive use of the controller, so you'll want to play on your TV to get the most out of the game anyway.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 19, 2012, 12:47:31 PM
The only thing it shares with a tablet is a screen, and even then it's low-res and resistive. It's nowhere near as advanced as the Kindle Fire. Besides that, there are $100 tablets, and the Wii Remote costs less than $10 to produce. It's more like Wii Remote Plus + 360 controller + a screen + whatever streaming tech they use. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you forgot that the controller can't stand on its own, since you'd have to be insane to think that Nintendo would bother with a controller that costs almost as much as a 3DS.
the contoller is effectively a 3DS with a weaker processor, no 3D, and a much larger screen.
Quote from: zephilicious on March 19, 2012, 03:45:56 PM
the contoller is effectively a 3DS with a weaker processor, no 3D, and a much larger screen.
"Weaker processor" is putting it extremely lightly. Also, what about the lack of a GPU, WiFi, flash memory, SD card slot, game card interface, RAM, and 3D cameras? And the fact that it has less components means a less complex motherboard. $100 is definitely impossible. Using your logic, the 3DS is just an iPad with a weaker processor, 3D, resistive touch, and much smaller screens. Do you see how ridiculous that sounds?
The Wii U controller is just like my cell phone.
Only difference is it's bigger, has more buttons, and isn't a cell phone.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 19, 2012, 03:58:18 PM
"Weaker processor" is putting it extremely lightly. Also, what about the lack of a GPU, WiFi, flash memory, SD card slot, game card interface, RAM, and 3D cameras? And the fact that it has less components means a less complex motherboard. $100 is definitely impossible. Using your logic, the 3DS is just an iPad with a weaker processor, 3D, resistive touch, and much smaller screens. Do you see how stupid that sounds?
nope that sounds pretty much right. the only other significant difference, admittedly missing in both my example and yours, is the ability to play 3ds games (the expensive part here is the stronger processor and the gpu). that is not half the cost of the 3DS. everything else you mentioned costs a dollar or two at most
aside from the price of the controller, we have to consider what goes into the console. the console needs to be as powerful as the wii, just to render the screen for one of these controllers. more powerful assuming resolution is not the only difference between the graphical capabilities of the two systems. for the system to be powerful enough to render an hd image to the tv and 4 sd images to the controllers, we're looking at double the power of the 360 or PS3, just to maintain last gen graphics. The console would have to launch at at least $400.
not only is that far too expensive, but most people wouldn't end up buying 3 more controllers (even at the $70 you suggest), so most of that extra hardware power just goes to waste.
How cool are we for bashing a console before it even comes out? :|
who's bashing?
Quote from: zephilicious on March 19, 2012, 05:13:27 PM
nope that sounds pretty much right. the only other significant difference, admittedly missing in both my example and yours, is the ability to play 3ds games (the expensive part here is the stronger processor and the gpu). that is not half the cost of the 3DS. everything else you mentioned costs a dollar or two at most
aside from the price of the controller, we have to consider what goes into the console. the console needs to be as powerful as the wii, just to render the screen for one of these controllers. more powerful assuming resolution is not the only difference between the graphical capabilities of the two systems. for the system to be powerful enough to render an hd image to the tv and 4 sd images to the controllers, we're looking at double the power of the 360 or PS3, just to maintain last gen graphics. The console would have to launch at at least $400.
not only is that far too expensive, but most people wouldn't end up buying 3 more controllers (even at the $70 you suggest), so most of that extra hardware power just goes to waste.
You have no clue how weak the PS3 and 360 are at this point, do you? In fact, you don't seem to have the slightest clue what you're talking about for several reasons.
This has more than triple the power of the PS3 and 360 GPUs, fyi: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102969 Saying that it needs to be $400 for double the power is silly. Also, I was only hoping for two controllers.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 19, 2012, 06:25:56 PM
You have no clue how weak the PS3 and 360 are at this point, do you? In fact, you don't seem to have the slightest clue what you're talking about for several reasons.
This has more than triple the power of the PS3 and 360 GPUs, fyi: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102969 Saying that it needs to be $400 for double the power is silly. Also, I was only hoping for two controllers.
of course the ps3 and 360 are weak as intercourse . and they still cost $250. theres this crazy thing called markup that applies when you dont buy raw components. and the wii u, at a minimum, would need to double their most expensive components to support 4 controllers (and it would still be outdated as intercourse at that point). If the GPU alone costs $100 as in your example we're talking closer to $600 minimum.
obviously nintendo is not stupid enough to charge that much, or stupid enough to offload the processor/gpu to the controllers (leading to $200 controllers), hence 1 controller.
Quote from: zephilicious on March 19, 2012, 06:46:14 PM
of course the ps3 and 360 are weak as intercourse . and they still cost $250. theres this crazy thing called markup that applies when you dont buy raw components. and the wii u, at a minimum, would need to double their most expensive components to support 4 controllers (and it would still be outdated as intercourse at that point). If the GPU alone costs $100 as in your example we're talking closer to $600 minimum.
obviously nintendo is not stupid enough to charge that much, or stupid enough to offload the processor/gpu to the controllers (leading to $200 controllers), hence 1 controller.
I know about mark-up. The thing is that it applies to graphics cards being sold at retail as well. Plus, graphics cards also have other components, the most important being RAM. (And that card has twice as much RAM as current consoles, though admittedly less than Wii U is rumored to have.) On top of that, the GPU of the card I linked to has a lot of unused silicon, so you might want to keep that in mind
And so you get it this time:
I never said anything about four controllers. Stop putting words into my mouth. And it would take
far more than twice the power to do that anyway.
On top of that, concerning the mark-up, there are several things that you didn't consider. For one, consoles rarely have a large mark-up at release. Most are sold at a loss at launch. Even the Wii supposedly only had a $6-8 profit at first. 3DS is even being sold at a loss for the time being. You're also discounting a couple of things in regard to current consoles. For one, the cheapest 360 is $200, and likely still has a nice mark-up on top of that. At this point in the generation, it likely costs Mircosoft closer to $150 to produce and sell. You might want to look at PS3 as a counterpoint, but PS3 has pretty exotic components compared to 360 and Wii U, plus it had an HDD while Wii U does not, so it's not a good reference point for Wii U's cost, whereas Wii U is basically a more modern 360 in terms of overall system architecture.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 19, 2012, 08:03:08 PM
I know about mark-up. The thing is that it applies to graphics cards being sold at retail as well. Plus, graphics cards also have other components, the most important being RAM. (And that card has twice as much RAM as current consoles, though admittedly less than Wii U is rumored to have.) On top of that, the GPU of the card I linked to has a lot of unused silicon, so you might want to keep that in mind
the markup is significantly less on individual components, hence self assembled PCs costing less than half of equivalent manufactured PCs
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 19, 2012, 08:03:08 PM
And so you get it this time: I never said anything about four controllers. Stop putting words into my mouth. And it would take far more than twice the power to do that anyway.
I'm sticking with 4 because 2 makes just as little sense as 1. And while it may exaggerate my numbers a bit, the point is the same.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 19, 2012, 08:03:08 PM
On top of that, concerning the mark-up, there are several things that you didn't consider. For one, consoles rarely have a large mark-up at release. Most are sold at a loss at launch. Even the Wii supposedly only had a $6-8 profit at first. 3DS is even being sold at a loss for the time being. You're also discounting a couple of things in regard to current consoles. For one, the cheapest 360 is $200, and likely still has a nice mark-up on top of that. At this point in the generation, it likely costs Mircosoft closer to $150 to produce and sell. You might want to look at PS3 as a counterpoint, but PS3 has pretty exotic components compared to 360 and Wii U, plus it had an HDD while Wii U does not, so it's not a good reference point for Wii U's cost, whereas Wii U is basically a more modern 360 in terms of overall system architecture.
to my understanding the ps3 and 360 are still sold at a loss. I don't know if the 3DS is sold at a loss, but if so it's the first Nintendo console to do so, and probably only after the early and likely unplanned price drop.
Quote from: Pennington on March 14, 2012, 11:50:47 AM
I miss the time where you could just hold a thing with buttons to play a console game. No arm-swinging motion controls or looking at a second screen in your lap every now and then.
Those were simpler days.
Xbox 360? PS3? Virtual console controller? Or were you just talking about the hype about "innovation"?
Quote from: Doodle on March 15, 2012, 12:01:05 PM
We just need a Gamecube controller made specifically for the Wii U
I think they did that for Wii, but it wasn't really pushed
You mean the virtual console controller? If I recall correctly, it was updated to be more ergonomic with handles. Is that the one you're talking about?
In any case, I thought that the virtual console controller worked very well. I'd really like to see a Wii U counterpart.
Quote from: RX-78-2 on March 20, 2012, 01:18:27 AM
Xbox 360? PS3? Virtual console controller? Or were you just talking about the hype about "innovation"?
I wish everything stayed primarily in controllers. The Wii, Kinect, Move, etc. all seem like good ideas at first, but I still prefer handheld controllers. All those Wii games that used the Wiimote and Nunchuk together like a controller? Wasn't too crazy about that.
Quote from: zephilicious on March 19, 2012, 11:05:49 PM
the markup is significantly less on individual components, hence self assembled PCs costing less than half of equivalent manufactured PCs
It's less to the consumer. However, PCs have a much higher mark-up than consoles, so that's not really relevant
Quote from: zephilicious on March 19, 2012, 11:05:49 PM
I'm sticking with 4 because 2 makes just as little sense as 1. And while it may exaggerate my numbers a bit, the point is the same.
No, it's not the same. :/
Quote from: zephilicious on March 19, 2012, 11:05:49 PM
to my understanding the ps3 and 360 are still sold at a loss. I don't know if the 3DS is sold at a loss, but if so it's the first Nintendo console to do so, and probably only after the early and likely unplanned price drop.
By "understanding" do you mean "random guess"? I'm not even going to give you the links that prove you wrong since
they're the first result on Google.Also, GameCube was sold at a small loss when its price was cut to $99. Of course, you're going to take that to mean that Nintendo would never launch at a loss, and my response to that is that, before 3DS, they never nearly cut a system's price in half just a few months before launch either. If they have a reason to take a loss, they will. And, most likely, they'll have to since I'm sure that they don't want to make people start thinking that every Nintendo system from this pint on with get a huge price drop a few months after launch.
my 'understanding' was prior knowledge backed up some quick searching, but i didnt bother to look around much because this is an internet argument
and now you're changing the point entirely.
nintendo doesnt have to take a loss unless they include technology that they've stated will not be included.
this is not a loss worth taking as adding the ability to use expensive controllers will not significantly increase software sales.
Quote from: zephilicious on March 20, 2012, 03:42:16 PM
my 'understanding' was prior knowledge backed up some quick searching, but i didnt bother to look around much because this is an internet argument
and now you're changing the point entirely.
nintendo doesnt have to take a loss unless they include technology that they've stated will not be included.
this is not a loss worth taking as adding the ability to use expensive controllers will not significantly increase software sales.
I'm only talking about a small loss. Maybe a few dollars. The can't charge more than $350, and they know that. I mean, it needs at least a 50% increase in power over the current gen just to maintain current gen graphics on both the TV at 720p and the subscreen. This isn't going to be cheap for them, but at the same time they can't do a repeat of the 3DS situation. It would be better to just take the loss by choice from the start than to charge $400 and end up having to take an even bigger loss when they make a giant price cut. Would you buy this for $400? Would you even buy it for $300? I just can't see a situation where they can sell this for a profit.
Retro is rumored to be working a new "hardcore" IP with great graphics. If this is true, My doubts die completely.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 22, 2012, 04:03:54 AM
Retro is rumored to be working a new "hardcore" IP with great graphics. If this is true, My doubts die completely.
Let it be a Star Fox game or a F-Zero game. I'd kill for any of those two.
Quote from: NoiseHunterChris on March 22, 2012, 11:03:03 AM
Let it be a Star Fox game or a F-Zero game. I'd kill for any of those two.
"Hardcore" as in PS3/360 "hardcore" gamers. The exact source said that they're "aggressively targeting the XBOX/PS3 demographic". and that it's not Zelda, DK, or Metriod Prime. That more than likely means a new IP. (And, sadly, would likely be an online FPS.)
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 22, 2012, 02:18:29 PM
"Hardcore" as in PS3/360 "hardcore" gamers. The exact source said that they're "aggressively targeting the XBOX/PS3 demographic". and that it's not Zelda, DK, or Metriod Prime. That more than likely means a new IP. (And, sadly, would likely be an online FPS.)
Oh my goodness, no. We can't allow this to happen. I do not want a clone of a FPS game.
Quote from: NoiseHunterChris on March 22, 2012, 03:18:56 PM
Oh my goodness, no. We can't allow this to happen. I do not want a clone of a FPS game.
Well, it could also be action adventure, I guess. However, if it's an FPS, I'm sure that would stand out from the crowd in some major way. Not all FPSs have to be CoD clones.
http://www.slashgear.com/dear-nintendo-dont-launch-the-wii-u-this-year-22219654/
My poor brain cells. :(
EDIT: Also, DS2 dev says that it's equal to current gen, but it seems more like they're just trying to say it as an excuse for not upgrading the graphics for the Wii U version. I know this because they said that they're not going to upgrade the textures, which is the one thing we know for certain Wii U has a clear advantage over the current-gen.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 23, 2012, 04:57:06 AM
http://www.slashgear.com/dear-nintendo-dont-launch-the-wii-u-this-year-22219654/
My poor brain cells. :(
To be fair, the article doesn't outright state it won't come out. The author is wildly speculating and pissing people off.
Dude, you've got to choose your sources correctly.
I'm guessing Hero understands that seeing as the URL itself is commanding Nintendo to not release the Wii U this year, not confirming it won't be released this year.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 23, 2012, 04:57:06 AM
http://www.slashgear.com/dear-nintendo-dont-launch-the-wii-u-this-year-22219654/
My poor brain cells. :(
EDIT: Also, DS2 dev says that it's equal to current gen, but it seems more like they're just trying to say it as an excuse for not upgrading the graphics for the Wii U version. I know this because they said that they're not going to upgrade the textures, which is the one thing we know for certain Wii U has a clear advantage over the current-gen.
Notice how 51 out of the 55 people who read that article voted it down so far.
Quote from: NoiseHunterChris on March 23, 2012, 08:22:57 AM
To be fair, the article doesn't outright state it won't come out. The author is wildly speculating and pissing people off.
Dude, you've got to choose your sources correctly.
Yes, I know that it's a request. However, it's a dumb request.
What are you talking about with the sources thing?
By the way, I found out that it wasn't a dev, but rather DS2's game director and that his info was second-hand and paraphrased.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/45/Sonic_Colors_box_artwork.png)
I want this game released in HD for Wii U, or at least another game in the same vain
ヽ(´ー｀)ノ
I don't know why but I can't really get into Sonic Colors.
I really like Sonic Generations though.
It'll be successful. There are lots of possibilities that can be explored.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-06-15-wii-u-cant-play-dvds-or-blu-rays
Nintendo opts to remain a few steps behind other consoles in one regard, but does that matter?
Quote from: Pennington on March 29, 2012, 11:50:54 AM
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-06-15-wii-u-cant-play-dvds-or-blu-rays
Nintendo opts to remain a few steps behind other consoles in one regard, but does that matter?
Yes, because its price will be less in that case. It's a gaming console and it should be like that.
All of you guys better get the Wii U and spread the word.
Quote from: NoiseHunterChris on March 29, 2012, 12:31:35 PM
Yes, because its price will be less in that case. It's a gaming console and it should be like that.
>Price will be less
The wii has the ability to play DVD's, yet Nintendo decided not to have the function available.
Who the intercourse doesn't have a dvd player at this point?
Quote from: NoiseHunterChris on March 29, 2012, 12:31:35 PM
Yes, because its price will be less in that case. It's a gaming console and it should be like that.
You think Nintendo will pass the cost to customers? lolno
Quote from: SilverHunter35 on March 29, 2012, 01:15:52 PM
>Price will be less
The wii has the ability to play DVD's, yet Nintendo decided not to have the function available.
They have to pay a licensing fee for each console to play DVDs. Those 5 cents really add up, you know!
See there's two sides to this. First of all, consoles have been playing DVDs for years now (except anything Nintendo), so it's kind of weird how Nintendo isn't caught up there.
But on the other hand, and this point actually seems more logical, everyone who cares about DVDs has a DVD player. No one's going to buy the Wii U just because it can also play DVDs. Everyone either A) doesn't watch anything on DVD or B) has a DVD player already. Maybe not so many people had them back when the PS3 came out (though I doubt that) but virtually everyone already has one now.
Quote from: Pennington on March 29, 2012, 03:04:01 PM
See there's two sides to this. First of all, consoles have been playing DVDs for years now (except anything Nintendo), so it's kind of weird how Nintendo isn't caught up there.
But on the other hand, and this point actually seems more logical, everyone who cares about DVDs has a DVD player. No one's going to buy the Wii U just because it can also play DVDs. Everyone either A) doesn't watch anything on DVD or B) has a DVD player already. Maybe not so many people had them back when the PS3 came out (though I doubt that) but virtually everyone already has one now.
What about Blu-Ray? There's no excuse for that one.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on March 29, 2012, 03:21:08 PM
What about Blu-Ray? There's no excuse for that one.
BLU-RAY MOVIES ARE TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE
I don't have a blu-ray player and frankly don't really give a poop. All my DVDs are just regular DVDs anyway.
Quote from: Pennington on March 29, 2012, 03:44:26 PM
BLU-RAY MOVIES ARE TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE
I don't have a blu-ray player and frankly don't really give a poop. All my DVDs are just regular DVDs anyway.
Wii U's disc format is based on Blu-Ray based on what has been said, so it's all about saving a few cents per unit.
Quote from: Pennington on March 29, 2012, 03:44:26 PM
BLU-RAY MOVIES ARE TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE
so are dvds if you're buying at msrp
blu-rays are just as cheap if you don't buy them from a big retailer on launch day
the problem with blu-ray is that they'll be obsolete just as fast as dvds were, probably faster.
Quote from: Kayo on March 20, 2012, 11:51:29 AM
I wish everything stayed primarily in controllers. The Wii, Kinect, Move, etc. all seem like good ideas at first, but I still prefer handheld controllers. All those Wii games that used the Wiimote and Nunchuk together like a controller? Wasn't too crazy about that.
Yeah, I feel the same way. Honestly, I do enjoy the using the Wiimotes to aim for shooters. I actually really liked
Red Steel and especially
RE4: Wii Edition. I don't know much about Move though, and I'm not really interested in Kinect.
Quote from: RX-78-2 on March 31, 2012, 09:35:40 PM
Yeah, I feel the same way. Honestly, I do enjoy the using the Wiimotes to aim for shooters. I actually really liked Red Steel and especially RE4: Wii Edition. I don't know much about Move though, and I'm not really interested in Kinect.
It's all about getting video gamers off their asses, blah blah blah. But they're not video games as we know them anymore; I don't even feel comfortable calling things on Kinect, etc. "video games".
I agree. Not much of it is done in the same spirit as traditional gaming. Since motion controls have just come out for each major console, I'm not sure if the novelty will hold up to boost sales. But on the other hand, it could work just as well since they're the "latest and greatest" trend in gaming.
ARGH. Trends? In my video games? I remember when trends were WWII games or zombies games (the latter of course still being popular). WHAT HAS THE (gaming) WORLD COME TO?
Of course the WiiU should play DVD's and Blu-Rays (if it's actually using that storage medium). Making it less functional in the name of even a slight price drop is just kind of dumb. I love my PS3 because it means I don't also have to buy a Blu-Ray player as well. It just does that as well. If Nintendo doesn't want to go out of their way to say, make deals with every tech giant to get Hulu, and other media streaming devices, is fine, but they should at least let us do what the system can actually do. It's one of the major killing points of the Wii. The potential to do some of the things the others are doing are there, Nintendo is just holding it back for no reason whatsoever.
Quote from: Nayrman on April 02, 2012, 06:29:43 PM
Of course the WiiU should play DVD's and Blu-Rays (if it's actually using that storage medium). Making it less functional in the name of even a slight price drop is just kind of dumb. I love my PS3 because it means I don't also have to buy a Blu-Ray player as well. It just does that as well. If Nintendo doesn't want to go out of their way to say, make deals with every tech giant to get Hulu, and other media streaming devices, is fine, but they should at least let us do what the system can actually do. It's one of the major killing points of the Wii. The potential to do some of the things the others are doing are there, Nintendo is just holding it back for no reason whatsoever.
... But they are making deals with Hulu and Netflix.
Oh, and there's a rumor that the release date is November 18th, but I wouldn't call the source "reliable." Also, since I know someone will bring up the weaker than current-gen rumor, I just want to say that if there's a dev out there who would say something as silly as "the graphics aren't as powerful," I really don't care what they have to say. lol
Criticizing the wii U for not having the ability to play DVD's or Blu-rays is funny.
Nintendo has yet to have a console that does either. The Gamecube couldn't because of "piracy", the Wii couldn't for god knows why and the Wii U can't because the format is ancient and while Blu-rays are the new thing it really shouldn't matter anyway. We all have DVD players already. The console is a dedicated game machine. Functionality is great and all, but really, I have about 8 devices that can play DVD's. I think I'm fine.
I actually wouldn't mind the Wii U having a blu-ray player. I mean, I only have an old-fashioned DVD player, and I really don't have plans to buy a blu-ray player, even though I'm most likely getting a Wii U.
also i'd like to comment on the recent rumor that the Wii U is weaker than the 360/PS3
The source is anonymous. Gearbox, Epic, EA, and Ubisoft all say otherwise. I'd rather go with the professionals on this.
Quote from: Not Sad Keanu on April 04, 2012, 08:52:29 AM
also i'd like to comment on the recent rumor that the Wii U is weaker than the 360/PS3
The source is anonymous. Gearbox, Epic, EA, and Ubisoft all say otherwise. I'd rather go with the professionals on this.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on April 03, 2012, 02:44:21 PM
... But they are making deals with Hulu and Netflix.
Oh, and there's a rumor that the release date is November 18th, but I wouldn't call the source "reliable." Also, since I know someone will bring up the weaker than current-gen rumor, I just want to say that if there's a dev out there who would say something as silly as "the graphics aren't as powerful," I really don't care what they have to say. lol
And, frankly, I don't know what the intercourse is going on, so please just ignore everything.
I miss being 14 and not giving a poop. All of this insanity is making my hair gray.
Remember when the Gamecube was the cool new thing everyone had?
Why can't it be 2001 again
Quote from: Kayo on April 04, 2012, 04:33:14 PM
Remember when the Gamecube was the cool new thing everyone had?
Why can't it be 2001 again
Because I don't want to be 9 again. Please no.
This is my 5,666th post. That says a lot, doesn't it?
We can consider third-party support out, even for current gen ports. Nintendo can't even get intercourse ing Capcom to support the thing.
http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/122/1222590p1.html?utm_campaign=ign+main+twitter&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wii_U_games
It's about what you'd expect from pre-launch line-up Hero.
Capcom refuses to take risks these days.
Quote from: Z on April 10, 2012, 08:27:19 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wii_U_games
It's about what you'd expect from pre-launch line-up Hero.
Capcom refuses to take risks these days.
RE:R on 3DS was a 10x bigger risk.
I have to politely disagree.
Quote from: Z on April 10, 2012, 09:00:02 AM
I have to politely disagree.
A high-budget horror game on a handheld? How is that not a risk? Plus, looking at its terrible sales, it obviously wasn't a safe bet.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on April 10, 2012, 10:46:31 AM
A high-budget horror game on a handheld? How is that not a risk? Plus, looking at its terrible sales, it obviously wasn't a safe bet.
520k+ copies is not "terrible". It's a modest success. Not every game can be Kinect Adventures or New Super Mario Bros.
Basically what I'm getting at is that I highly doubt that it did not make a profit. There is no way that game cost Capcom upwards of 20 million to develop.
Quote from: Z on April 10, 2012, 12:08:56 PM
520k+ copies is not "terrible". It's a modest success. Not every game can be Kinect Adventures or New Super Mario Bros.
Basically what I'm getting at is that I highly doubt that it did not make a profit. There is no way that game cost Capcom upwards of 20 million to develop.
Capcom gets maybe half of the retail price of each unit, so $10 million sounds more like what they got. I doubt the budget (including marketing) was much less than that.
On that note, would anyone buy a Wii U if it costs $399?
Because games?
Quote from: Z on April 10, 2012, 03:35:59 PM
Because games?
No, I mean would you buy it at that price?
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on April 10, 2012, 03:40:22 PM
No, I mean would you buy it at that price?
People bought 360 at that price.
And then they all had to buy another one.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on April 10, 2012, 03:40:22 PM
No, I mean would you buy it at that price?
I'm still on the fence about it. Abandoning traditional controller support is a really really bad move on Nintendo's part.
For me to buy a Wii U, a few criteria need to be met.
1) Nintendo pulls off The Nintendo Network well(bahahaha)
2) Traditional controller functionality isn't canned
3) The platform has at least Nintendo providing it with a solid lineup of games(I enjoyed my N64, GCN, and Wii. Nintendo makes good poop a lot of the time)
I'm not worried about number 3, but number 1 and 2 could go either way. I've seen nothing on traditional controller functionality at all. Or even anything on local multiplayer for that matter.
Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if this thing was a success if Nintendo plays their cards right. People these days love luxury devices and tv/console/tablet interactivity is something that a lot of people would be interested in. The Wii brand is still thriving as well. So who knows where this could go.
Quote from: The True Nicolas Cage on April 10, 2012, 03:46:36 PM
People bought 360 at that price.
And then they all had to buy another one.
I traded in my third refurbished(had to keep sending xbox after xbox in after buying one new) for the new black model at GS a few years ago. Never once bought a new one after the first.
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on April 10, 2012, 03:10:31 PM
Capcom gets maybe half of the retail price of each unit, so $10 million sounds more like what they got. I doubt the budget (including marketing) was much less than that.
On that note, would anyone buy a Wii U if it costs $399?
Please tell me that's way higher than what the actual price will be.
I'm not buying it at that price. I'll stick to my screenless controllers until it drops to $250 or lower.
I'm predicting $299.99 though.
Parts cost $180
Combine that with assembly, worker's wages, shipping, advertising, etc. and yeah I wouldn't be surprised at a $399.99 price tag.
Quote from: Z on April 10, 2012, 05:10:14 PM
Parts cost $180
Combine that with assembly, worker's wages, shipping, advertising, etc. and yeah I wouldn't be surprised at a $399.99 price tag.
Please don't state rumors as fact, especially ones from sketchy sources.
Quote from: Z on April 10, 2012, 05:10:14 PM
Parts cost $180
Combine that with assembly, worker's wages, shipping, advertising, etc. and yeah I wouldn't be surprised at a $399.99 price tag.
Statistics.
85% are made up on the spot
I wonder how much of an advantage they will have releasing their next generation console so early. The Move and Kinect were supposed to add life to the PS3/360, don't know if it's really doing that, but that's what was planned.
One can only wonder what will be announced at E3.
Quote from: Kayo on April 10, 2012, 05:29:52 PM
Statistics.
85% are made up on the spot
My post wasn't a statistic. What the intercourse are you talking about?
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on April 10, 2012, 05:19:50 PM
Please don't state rumors as fact, especially ones from sketchy sources.
Wasn't explicitly decreeing that my post was absolute, though I can see how it could be seen that way. It could be challenged. For the record, $180 sounds about right plus or minus some.
Quote from: Z on April 10, 2012, 06:15:10 PM
My post wasn't a statistic. What the intercourse are you talking about?
Wasn't explicitly decreeing that my post was absolute, though I can see how it could be seen that way. It could be challenged. For the record, $180 sounds about right plus or minus some.
You pulled the parts cost out your left ass.
Quote from: Kayo on April 10, 2012, 06:41:14 PM
You pulled the parts cost out your left ass.
Even if I did fabricate the claim, that wouldn't make it a statistic. You're not really making any sense here.
The rumor exists.
http://www.forgetthebox.net/mag/culture/forum-m/rumor-wii-u-price.php
Quote from: Z on April 10, 2012, 06:45:55 PM
Even if I did fabricate the claim, that wouldn't make it a statistic. You're not really making any sense here.
The rumor exists.
http://www.forgetthebox.net/mag/culture/forum-m/rumor-wii-u-price.php
The what exists?
Nope
FYI: Nintendo will not announce the price at E3.
EDIT: The Wii U shop will be ready at launch with downloads of full retail games.
I read the no price tag at E3 as well. To be honest, I think that is a bad move. With the economy so tight, it'd probably be a good idea to give us some kind of indication of price ahead of time so those of us with sketchy job situations (as in, ALL of us) can save up appropriately or so. or at least plan around it. Obviously that depends on when Nintendo wants to announce it, but hopefully it'll be a "end of summer, AT LATEST" deals.
I hope that second part Darkness, is true as well, as hopefully that means Nintendo has finally decided to put some darn memory in their system. Yeesh.
Also, the Nintendo Network better not blow, or they're effectively dead in the water from Day 1.
Quote from: Nayrman on April 26, 2012, 06:53:41 PM
I read the no price tag at E3 as well. To be honest, I think that is a bad move. With the economy so tight, it'd probably be a good idea to give us some kind of indication of price ahead of time so those of us with sketchy job situations (as in, ALL of us) can save up appropriately or so. or at least plan around it. Obviously that depends on when Nintendo wants to announce it, but hopefully it'll be a "end of summer, AT LATEST" deals.
I hope that second part Darkness, is true as well, as hopefully that means Nintendo has finally decided to put some darn memory in their system. Yeesh.
Also, the Nintendo Network better not blow, or they're effectively dead in the water from Day 1.
They probably have it down to a range, and will decide which end of the range to go with based on E3 reactions so they don't end up having to change the price after announcing it. Doing that would look pretty bad, especially to investors.
Speaking of price... http://www.gamefocus.ca/news/16600.html
Edit: Thinking about investors made me decide to check the stock price, and it actually hit a new low for the past year (possibly past five years) today. You can bet that they'll be very cautious from this point on.
if nintendo had decided on a price they would announce it at E3. any retailer 'leak' is just speculation
Quote from: zephilicious on May 01, 2012, 11:54:28 AM
if nintendo had decided on a price they would announce it at E3. any retailer 'leak' is just speculation
Likely, but from what I heard something similar happened with Wii. Plus, there's no guarantee that they're so eager to announce a price ASAP. If they think the price might be too high, they might not want to kill the hype at the biggest gaming event of the year by announcing it.