Wii U - Nintendo's Next Console

[KingBroly]

Well there's a rumor going around that the Wii U has one of these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPGPU

I don't know what that means though.

And to be honest, it doesn't sound like Sony's playing the "OMGHARDWARE" battle next gen, either. Or at least as much of one as Microsoft will be.

[Broken_Cartridge]

they just can't deliver any straightforward messages about this whole damn console. We still don't know about voice chat (which is such a standard in online gaming these days), we still don't know how easy/difficult it is to add people online, we don't know exactly how much memory it has (i think i heard 8gb, which is laughable).

come to think of it, wtf did we find out from their E3 press conference other than a load of crap about nintendoland, just dance 4 and reggies body?

I'm 90% sure they confirmed voice and video chat support.

And the RAM is supposedly 2gb (Wii had 88mb) with 1.5+gb allocated to developers at the moment. This is expected to climb to something like 1.7 - 1.8gb though.

Yeah they confirmed video and voice chat, but they did not confirm whether or not you will be able to cross game chat which is much more important to me.

[Devil_Rising]

Well there's a rumor going around that the Wii U has one of these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPGPU

I don't know what that means though.

And to be honest, it doesn't sound like Sony's playing the "OMGHARDWARE" battle next gen, either. Or at least as much of one as Microsoft will be.

As I've said before, I don't think either company is going to be playing that game as much as people think next gen. In fact, I'd be shocked if either of their next consoles are really THAT much more powerful than Wii U. Why? Because they don't want a repeat of what happened last time: grossly overpriced consoles that were STILL losing them money for every console sold, and gamers were, for the most part, very slow to run out and buy EITHER system at first, because of both a lack of killer titles, and the aforementioned grossly overblown price tag. Most gamers can't afford to blow $400-600 on a game console, and that's WITHOUT games, extra controllers, XBox Live subscriptions, and all that other s***.

If they did that again, it would pretty much be suicide, from a certain point of view, because while they wound up okay this gen eventually, you KNOW that Wii U is going to sell like hotcakes, regardless of what some people are trying to say about it now. I think last time, they didn't take Nintendo seriously enough, and assumed (like most) that their follow-up to Gamecube would not sell huge numbers, and thus not be a big threat, so they could make their consoles cost whatever they wanted. That was arrogance on their part, and look what happened. The Wii has sold close to a 100 million worldwide, without the benefit of a 10+ year life-cycle like the PS2 had.


I just don't see it. It's not necessary, and it wouldn't be cost effective for them or the consumer.

[motherbra1n]

Well there's a rumor going around that the Wii U has one of these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPGPU

I don't know what that means though.

And to be honest, it doesn't sound like Sony's playing the "OMGHARDWARE" battle next gen, either. Or at least as much of one as Microsoft will be.

As I've said before, I don't think either company is going to be playing that game as much as people think next gen. In fact, I'd be shocked if either of their next consoles are really THAT much more powerful than Wii U. Why? Because they don't want a repeat of what happened last time: grossly overpriced consoles that were STILL losing them money for every console sold, and gamers were, for the most part, very slow to run out and buy EITHER system at first, because of both a lack of killer titles, and the aforementioned grossly overblown price tag. Most gamers can't afford to blow $400-600 on a game console, and that's WITHOUT games, extra controllers, XBox Live subscriptions, and all that other s***.

If they did that again, it would pretty much be suicide, from a certain point of view, because while they wound up okay this gen eventually, you KNOW that Wii U is going to sell like hotcakes, regardless of what some people are trying to say about it now. I think last time, they didn't take Nintendo seriously enough, and assumed (like most) that their follow-up to Gamecube would not sell huge numbers, and thus not be a big threat, so they could make their consoles cost whatever they wanted. That was arrogance on their part, and look what happened. The Wii has sold close to a 100 million worldwide, without the benefit of a 10+ year life-cycle like the PS2 had.


I just don't see it. It's not necessary, and it wouldn't be cost effective for them or the consumer.

I dunno I kind of struggle to imagine sony advertising any of their products without them more or less shouting "OH MY GOD LOOK AT THE GRAPHICS, YOU CAN SEE EVERY BIT OF DIRT ON DRAKES FACE"

360 vs ps3: performace (360) beats graphics (ps3)
3ds vs vita: quality and ease of development (3ds) beats graphics(vita) even with it's relatively competitive price

to me sony value graphics above all else, above performance, above ease of porting/developing games. Like nintendo, they are too stubborn to change their ways. they just do not understand that they can no longer cater so specifically to tech geeks anymore who judge a console almost purely on it's specs and graphical tech demo's, and if they do that again they will dreamcast themselves the same way nintendo are going to dreamcast themselves with the wii u if they don't make some really important changes to the system.

[joesiv]

Well there's a rumor going around that the Wii U has one of these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPGPU

I don't know what that means though.

It means that the graphics hardware is designated for use as general processing. This likely would only be designated this way if the CPU is dependent on that extra computational power to compensate for something.

There is a current speculation that the Wii U's CPU is more of a multi core diritivitive of the Wii CPU (3 of them, with more cache, and higher clocks), this of course would be handy since backwards compatibility of Wii games is trivial (byte code compatible), and to offset the lack of CPU grunt, the GPU will be relied upon. In a general sense GPU's these days with their "compute cores" are very very simliar to the PS3's SPE's (it had 7 of them, 6 for use by devs), and the PS3 had 1 SPU (general purpose core, Xbox had 3 of those).

The sad thing is, if Nintendo is relying on the GPU to offset the CPU, that means that relatively speaking the GPU performance (for graphics) will go down. The once 1.5x GPU performance once utlitized by developers will drop.

The plus side is that as developers (and middleware) get used to using the compute cores on the GPU things like physics can really start smoking.

[varoennauraa]

I think, that until now Sony has valued difference(and perhaps efficiency IF you really pay attention to its programming quirks) in its processor architecture, but it only works for 3rd party heavy game company if you are the leader. Vita's off the shelf components shows slightly humbler tone in Sonys attitude, and it seems that Sony isn't investing quite so much in R/D this time around with PS4 either. I have a hunch, that Nintendo might be trying to differentiate it self, not only in input methods, but also in engine room this time, as it seems to be getting, idk, a nice year lead. I have no idea how difficult it would be to port, say, a bit higher quality second wave game that was optimized for GPGPU into different architecture, but after panicking about rumors of Wii U's even weaker than expected specs, I have started to have a good feeling about Wii U's specs again. It looks, that Nintendo is putting much effort and thought into developing as efficient console as possible to sell @ 250-300$.

Nintendo can survive with its own games and it doesn't have to worry about losing 3rd parties as they are gone anyway. I also have confidence, that Nintendo can pull of a couple of "mannequin games"(my term for a game, that is more like showing off, than business) too, that creates image of power, and competitors might even need to put a little effort in making appreciably more appealing games with their future reaching tech.

Perhaps Nintendo is aiming to lure some 3rd parties, who might be too afraid to take a leap of fate into the next gen and offer them a platform, where they could continue to make good business with their current engines and where they could hone them when they get acquainted with the Wii U's quirks. Many experienced game veterans got into a difficult situation even in last console transition, and sadly many legendary companies ceased to exist. I would think, that Nintendo could find many friends especially from japanese developer scene, and I have a feeling, that Wii U will be at least a lively home for new exclusive cult classics,even if it wouldn't get to be the leading 3rd party platform. I'm sure, that there will be "money on the table", and it will seduce more support, than what we saw in Wii, as every one had made very expensive, do or die -investments into the HD-Twins, and that ship wasn't going to turn. This time it must be alluring to be able to harvest a couple of more crops from those investments. I like the idea, that it seems, that Nintendo doesn't only make different consoles, but its also creating another tide; First theres big, but expensive jump in technology, and after that comes the Nintedo tide, which is a humble jump, but creates more value into it by other means and sells that in traditional console business prices.

[KingBroly]

A GPGPU would mean that Wii U isn't just some suped up 360, correct?

[gtt]

A GPGPU would mean that Wii U isn't just some suped up 360, correct?

not really. it just means that it has a gpu that was made post 2007. most modern gpus have this ability. you just have to have specific software that runs on them. nvidia makes some pretty specifically for this purpose though, the tesla line.

basically someone looked at gpus and thought "huh, those things have hundreds (now thousands) of cores and are very very very good at parallel problems. Lets write some software that takes advantage of that."

Nvidia calls it CUDA (hence, cuda cores) not sure what amd calls it.

[varoennauraa]

Nothing is confirmed, but rumors are pointing in 2XBox360's tapeducted direction, and are suggesting its done by meager CPU, thats supported by bit more powerful GPU. In paper it looks only so much more powerful, than XBox360, but to me it looks like much more specialized and efficient solution. One other interesting feature in the rumors is that it would have DSP -prosessor for sounds, that would also take burden from CPU(which some body said, that in extreme cases could eat entire core from XBox 360's processor). I'm not sure if its powerful enough, or is it just meant to fullfill typical audio needs of a game console, but DSP could also mean things like including environmental effects into voice chat.

And regarding the over reactions; while it would be convenient for inpatient fans like me to know the accurate specs and all the game play ideas they are planning, it would also be very convenient for Nintendos competitors, which is why Nintendo prefers to keep their cards in their sleeves until they are close to launch.

In some peoples eyes that seems to some how translate, that they are a lying bunch of bastards...but I don't remember them lying a single time. Well, I didn't say wow, when I saw Wii's graphics, but thats not a lie, especially compared to some companies flim·flammed wiki pages or "real time" CGI trailers.

[joesiv]

Nothing is confirmed,
<snip>
And regarding the over reactions; while it would be convenient for inpatient fans like me to know the accurate specs and all the game play ideas they are planning, it would also be very convenient for Nintendos competitors, which is why Nintendo prefers to keep their cards in their sleeves until they are close to launch.

This is true. And actually we are likely to never hear from nintendo what the actual specs of the machine are, in an official manor. For example with the Wii, the only reason we got the information of clock rates and such is due to leaked documentation from developers. Nintendo never told us! I happened to work for a developer at the time, and found it interesting how it all got leaked, and also reading speculation prior to that

Nintendo, as you said, has a lot to lose by disclosing the actual specifications especially since they are going to be out a full year prior to their main competitors. The competitors will surely not change their whole gameplan, but things like adding some memory, or increasing clocks is an easy thing to do.

I'm sure evetualy well find out what the detailed specs of the Wii U are, those wanting Nintendo to tell us are wasting their breath, it does them no good. Honestly it's the games and 3rd party support that is going to win them the game, not the specs!

They're not going to "beat" the Next Gen PS/Xbox in specs, consider they probably are targeting $300ish release price, maybe $350 is they want to push it. Nintendo stated that they don't want to take a loss on the hardware (they've never taken a loss at launch, and only now are taking a loss on the 3DS). They also state that the gamepad is taking a serious chunk out of that cost. What does that leave the console hardware cost at? Maybe $250-300 on the generous side!

Whereas Sony/MS have historically ALWAYS taken a loss on their hardware, the PS3 for example costed nearly $1000 in components, and they sold it for a loss. If they go with the same business model (I believe they'll be more modest in their losses this time around), they could still feasibly release a $499 console that has a component cost of upwards of $700!

The Wii U won't compete in specs.

However, something to consider is that the next Xbox is likely to be released packed in with a version 2 or 3 kinect, which like the gamepad will eat away at some of that component cost.

In the end, it's games and support that we need from nintendo's next console... I hope nintendo is working on the support side (especially by encouraging and supporting middle ware companies like Crytek, Epic, etc... for compatibility with next gen engines)

[led-naruto]

I dunno I kind of struggle to imagine sony advertising any of their products without them more or less shouting "OH MY GOD LOOK AT THE GRAPHICS, YOU CAN SEE EVERY BIT OF DIRT ON DRAKES FACE"

Sounds like another commercial of the baby doll crying over the Ps3...

[joesiv]

I dunno I kind of struggle to imagine sony advertising any of their products without them more or less shouting "OH MY GOD LOOK AT THE GRAPHICS, YOU CAN SEE EVERY BIT OF DIRT ON DRAKES FACE"
<snip>
...they just do not understand that they can no longer cater so specifically to tech geeks anymore who judge a console almost purely on it's specs and graphical tech demo's, and if they do that again they will dreamcast themselves the same way nintendo are going to dreamcast themselves with the wii u if they don't make some really important changes to the system.

Sadly the market that nintendo is trying to regain (core) are still focusing on graphics and big epic experiences. Things that are reliant on good technology both in software but more importantly hardware. It's easier to "add" the casual crowds with cheaper gimicky experiences (PS Move, Kinect, fitness, etc..) since they aren't reliant on super powerful machines (lowest common denominator). However, the graphic intensive stuff (things that will rely on engines like Unreal Engine 4 and the new Crytek stuff, maybe even the next Final Fantasy Engine) will rely on the most graphical power you can throw at it.

I agree though that Sony will be shouting graphics, and power in their marketing, they've already started it, when asked about the Wii U. Sadely developers are also listening to the same thing we're all hearing, and if the Wii U is considered the weak system, or not on par with the next Generation, nintendo will be in the same situation as the wii was, maybe somewhat better since they'll still have modernish graphics, but the differnce will be greater and greater as time goes on.

Besides release date and relative power, I don't see Nintendo doing the dreamcast thing. Nintendo can survive on just their own franchises, if they can get just a fraction of the major 3rd party releases, they'll be just fine. I don't think they'll have a "wii" situation though where they dominate, but they'll do fine.

Unfortunatly, as a Nintendo Fan myself (since NES days), I'd want nintendo to kill the competition, have all the third party support, and compete on the technology level as well (as I believe that's key to 3rd party support, and I'd love to see truely next gen nintendo games). Oh well, at least we're going to get HD nintendo franchises finally! I have a feeling that only a few franchises are really going to push the graphics though (zelda/metroid), the rest will just be smoother high rez versions (ala NSMB)

[ddddd]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.ph ... count=2222

The anti-aliasing will be implemented in nearly all launch games that
didn't had it this E3, and other things to increase the IQ. Consider this as
a fact, and it's reassuring

I really hated this guy's teases, but I got to admit he got a lot of things right unlike other rumorers out there.

[KingBroly]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=38907409&postcount=2222

The anti-aliasing will be implemented in nearly all launch games that
didn't had it this E3, and other things to increase the IQ. Consider this as
a fact, and it's reassuring

I really hated this guy's teases, but I got to admit he got a lot of things right unlike other rumorers out there.

I think the only thing he got wrong was the TV button. But to be fair, no one saw that coming. Nor does anyone see it as useful.

[ddddd]

And I think this post would have been good for the "where's third party support?" thread.
(If that guy has his info right, then wiiu is gettin only a small fraction of next gen games)

[Broken_Cartridge]

And I think this post would have been good for the "where's third party support?" thread.

I don't get it....

[ddddd]

And I think this post would have been good for the "where's third party support?" thread.

I don't get it....

The object in the image is a CD. That is the answer to the estimated support of upcoming next gen games wiiu will get (25% -> none).

[KingBroly]

You know...

Looking at the landscape of Wii U, PS4 and 720, it really seems to me like Nintendo is banking on budgets becoming too much of a burden to publishers, forcing their developers to make games on Wii U first and not breaking their bank. Or go out of business. Their choice of course.

This generation was pretty deadly for a lot of development houses and publishers looking to become the next "Super Star" of game development, and for the most part, it didn't work out. I imagine it's going to get a lot worse next generation if they don't start realizing what their problems are.

[Devil_Rising]

A GPGPU would mean that Wii U isn't just some suped up 360, correct?

not really. it just means that it has a gpu that was made post 2007. most modern gpus have this ability. you just have to have specific software that runs on them. nvidia makes some pretty specifically for this purpose though, the tesla line.

basically someone looked at gpus and thought "huh, those things have hundreds (now thousands) of cores and are very very very good at parallel problems. Lets write some software that takes advantage of that."

Nvidia calls it CUDA (hence, cuda cores) not sure what amd calls it.

Keep in mind (as few seem to actually do in these types of discussions), that comparing computer parts running PC games (along with everything else the PC is running) is not directly equatable to modified console parts, which typically only have to run a game, perhaps some minor background OS junk. It's hard to even really compare similar parts in game consoles to other consoles, because it's not directly parallel.

Making this kind of speculation not exactly pointless, but certainly muddled.

[Emily Rogers]

I think there might be more publishers/developers under NDA's concerning the Wii U now than before E3.

You know...

Looking at the landscape of Wii U, PS4 and 720, it really seems to me like Nintendo is banking on budgets becoming too much of a burden to publishers, forcing their developers to make games on Wii U first and not breaking their bank. Or go out of business. Their choice of course.

This generation was pretty deadly for a lot of development houses and publishers looking to become the next "Super Star" of game development, and for the most part, it didn't work out. I imagine it's going to get a lot worse next generation if they don't start realizing what their problems are.

It will make it harder for companies to risk massive budgets on new IP's/franchises. That's for sure.

[ddddd]

You know...

Looking at the landscape of Wii U, PS4 and 720, it really seems to me like Nintendo is banking on budgets becoming too much of a burden to publishers, forcing their developers to make games on Wii U first and not breaking their bank. Or go out of business. Their choice of course.

This generation was pretty deadly for a lot of development houses and publishers looking to become the next "Super Star" of game development, and for the most part, it didn't work out. I imagine it's going to get a lot worse next generation if they don't start realizing what their problems are.

What the guys at nintendo seem to have missed, is that developers would rather go bankrupt than lead-develop on wiiu.
IF the rumors are true, most big studios are transitioning to the other next gen consoles as lead development. Nintendo needs to secure these games by themselves somehow, because if they are expecting to get third party support just by offering free stuff then they will get an awful surprise.

[Emily Rogers]

Nintendo needs to secure these games themselves.

They are already doing it.

Publishing Lego City Undercover.
Publishing Ninja Gaiden 3.
Publishing Project P-100.

And they'll continue doing it.

[ddddd]

Nintendo needs to secure these games themselves.

They are already doing it.

Publishing Lego City Stories.
Publishing Ninja Gaiden 3.
Publishing Project P-100.

Not those...

[Emily Rogers]

Nintendo needs to secure these games themselves.

They are already doing it.

Publishing Lego City Stories.
Publishing Ninja Gaiden 3.
Publishing Project P-100.

Not those...

Nintendo has no intentions to throw gobs of money at publishers for ports. And it's not any cheaper for exclusives.

I think their new strategy to get third party support is to develop long term relationships with studios, like Team Ninja, Platinum, Travellers Tales, etc etc. It's cheaper for Nintendo to do this than to money hat a publisher.

[KingBroly]

If I were Nintendo, I would break ties with Team Ninja 3 years ago. They should try and branch out to more American and European Developers though. Traveler's Tales is...okay I guess, but they need to expand their reach beyond that.

I still don't understand why they haven't created new internal teams, or even if they have any interest in doing so.