Wii U Forum

Topic: current gen or next gen

Showing 81 to 100 of 262

AuthorMessage
Avatar

OptometristLime

81. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

I think the defintion for next gen ultimately lies in the opinion of what one would consider next gen. It would also help to consider that if the 1.25 to 3.2Ghz rumor is true(I think it could be, because 3.2Ghz is pretty standard, and Nintendo has limited hardware in the past), then Wii U will be able to compete even more so than people are willing to admit, even in terms of power.

We already established that clock speed is irrelevant when used independently to benchmark processing speed.
You are taking a number that is current in the industry and using it, irresponsibly in my mind, as something Nintendo should attain to.
It suggests to me that you haven't fully made up your mind about the position of the Wii U in the console lineup.

You are what you eat from your head to your feet.

AuthorMessage
Avatar

I-U

82. Posted:

The only developer opinions I care somewhat about in regards to Nintendo's consoles are from Nintendo's teams themselves. The Wii U is labeled as the successor of the Wii by them and so I can expect a level of quality out of their bigger games that can stand alongside their catalog of charming experiences. Nintendo's major Wii U games are the reason I got the Wii U.

Favorite Game: Metroid Prime Hunters

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

83. Posted:

OptometristLime wrote:

SCAR392 wrote:

I think the defintion for next gen ultimately lies in the opinion of what one would consider next gen. It would also help to consider that if the 1.25 to 3.2Ghz rumor is true(I think it could be, because 3.2Ghz is pretty standard, and Nintendo has limited hardware in the past), then Wii U will be able to compete even more so than people are willing to admit, even in terms of power.

We already established that clock speed is irrelevant when used independently to benchmark processing speed.
You are taking a number that is current in the industry and using it, irresponsibly in my mind, as something Nintendo should attain to.
It suggests to me that you haven't fully made up your mind about the position of the Wii U in the console lineup.

Actually, that ammount of Ghz would improve the systems performance quite a bit, taking in consideration the way the console was designed. We can't/won't be able to compare it to other consoles regardless because they are obviously different no matter how you put it, but we can scale how much of a difference it would make to the console we are discussing, which is Wii U.
There is also no way ANY person could have come to a conclusion about Wii U, deeming it to any position in the market. People were judging Wii U before it was even released. I actually do research and make educated guesses on this topic. I'm not saying it is fact NOR fiction, but the possibilty still remains.
3.2 Ghz is standard in plenty of machines, and I never once stated it as a requirment from Nintendo.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

84. Posted:

OptometristLime wrote:

@skywake

rises to his feet for a standing ovation

Untitled

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

OptometristLime

85. Posted:

Forgive my insistence upon accuracy, but:

OptometristLime wrote:

...clock speed is irrelevant when used independently to benchmark processing speed.

It's not a useful number (3.2 Ghz) because it is only meaningful when attached to a specific computer architecture.
As relating to current gen systems you have stated that:

SCAR392 wrote:

Actually, that ammount of Ghz would improve the systems performance quite a bit, taking in consideration the way the console was designed.

Which is actually part of my point, except that you feel for whatever reason that more hertz will equate to more power categorically. AND you are willing to believe outlandish rumors to that effect, which I must say puts a tarnish on your credibility.

Yea the Wii U is really a cheetah, that Nintendo released into the race wearing cinder blocks. For dramatic effect, or something.
It's not coming together for me...

Edited on by OptometristLime

You are what you eat from your head to your feet.

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

86. Posted:

@OptometristLime
The difference is access to said power. BTW, I thought the clockspeed was slow in the first place. 3.2 Ghz makes WAY more sense than 1.24. They limited the Wii U to compete with PS4 when the time comes, most likely. I don't really care if you think I'm credible or not.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

87. Posted:

Why would you release an artificially gimped console? If the Wii U could match the PS4/720 in terms of power at its price point why wouldn't they try to sell that fact from the start? It doesn't make any sense.

It's one thing to enjoy a console despite its specs because of loved content, it's another thing to bury your head in the sand and act like it's a powerhouse to make yourself feel better. Ignoring the fact that you also got it for the content. If you got it for its power you're kidding yourself.

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

88. Posted:

@skywake
They would release a gimped console to rope-a-dope until PS4 comes out, or the console is still in development at a consumer level which is more likely.
The price point doesn't matter much, because it is face value, it doesn't include a bigger HDD, and most likely won't support 4K when that hits a larger scale in the market.
I did buy it for said content, but I already knew it was more powerful than Xbox 360 and PS3. Even when it's clocked at 1.24GHz, it can still handke games better than last gen consoles.
I'm not burying my head in the sand. I'm digging up treasure in the sand. This is all sensible speculation.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

OptometristLime

89. Posted:

Speculation is not a defense, you are still obligated to this community to present things in an honest way.
Falsehoods should be revealed, not cloaked in fact, in order to make them perceptible to those outside your particular cosmoverse.

You are what you eat from your head to your feet.

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

90. Posted:

OptometristLime wrote:

Speculation is not a defense, you are still obligated to this community to present things in an honest way.
Falsehoods should be revealed, not cloaked in fact, in order to make them perceptible to those outside your particular cosmoverse.

I don't really get what this means, because it's not concrete from my perspective.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

OptometristLime

91. Posted:

Oh so concreteness is a point of interest, but only when evaluating my ideas.

To refuse my thesis and then use it against me, you are the master troll!

You are what you eat from your head to your feet.

AuthorMessage
Avatar

banacheck

92. Posted:

Captain_Balko

I'd also like to know if you were surprised at how many of us provided intelligent arguments to support the hypothesis that you (and others) have been misusing the term generation throughout this thread.

Actually most developers believe the Wii U is current generation, or have some of you been reading something i haven't where they've changed there mind. It's only a few developers that says otherwise, and no i don't care what anyone says on here the PS4 is league's ahead of the Wii U. And no i've not edited crap i'll say again what i said before, in treams of power the Wii U is closer to current gen then the PS4 next gen. Jump over to a creditable website digital foundary, then please come back and tell me otherwise.

And i was making a point about power in a console, because when anyone talks about say the the PS4 etc, on here most of you see power as graphics. So i said why on earth would Nintendo upgrade from the Wii to the Wii U, if like some of you say power wasn't important?

Edited on by banacheck

banacheck

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

93. Posted:

@banacheck
Read my post on the previous page, I addressed all of your points

@SCAR392
The console already exists. The Wii U is physically sitting under your TV right now. Right now they want to sell as many units before the other competitors of this generation get their acts together. With that in mind why would they limit it now? What advantage does that give them in terms of sales? Your argument doesn't make any sense at all.

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

banacheck

94. Posted:

As a random person on the internet without a degree in chipset technology,

I'm sure the person who reversed engineered the Wii U does, and i very much doubt it's call a chipset degree.

Time and time again we are shocked at the amount of "power" that can be squeezed out of consoles;

Nintendo are not the only one who modified there parts, every console does and thats to future proof there console as they usually upgrade every 5years. and in the year 2013 you don't need a £2,500 PC, and not even High end PC uses 8GB GDDR5 ( On the market) Rant over.

skywake thanks

Edited on by banacheck

banacheck

AuthorMessage
Avatar

banacheck

95. Posted:

But i also think Nintendo & Sony are looking at two totally different markets, where Nintendo doesn't need to make a PS4 for what they want yo use it for. Most people not all own different consoles anyway.

banacheck

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

96. Posted:

OptometristLime wrote:

Oh so concreteness is a point of interest, but only when evaluating my ideas.

To refuse my thesis and then use it against me, you are the master troll!

The difference was that I actually was discussing the hardware. You said not to envelope faslehood with facts. It can go either way(envelope facts in falsehood).
The only way I would think any differently about my figures regarding the hardware and how it can be used is if you had physical evidence to state otherwise. Not moral values.

@skywake
Just because the console is on the market, does not mean they have any plans to push it in the faces of consumers yet. It wouldn't make sense, because Nintendo is optimizing the console while still available for purchase.
Their console was, and still is pretty bare for the most part, but the spring and summer update show they released an unfinished console. Many have already judged the console based on literally nothing, and have most likely moved on and look forward to what Nintendo didn't show right from the get go. The console has more to show than what it currently is, and the only way to combat the negativity is to wait until at least the PS4 hits shelves, then go all out to compete.
Wii U being on store shelves at all has more chance of getting sales than PS4, which is not on shelves at all.

I have no doubt in my mind Sony is doing exactly what Nintendo is right now, except the product isn't in stores.

My analogy for how this gen will turn out in car talk, is:

Wii U = V6 with Nos
PS4 = V8
Xbox∞ = V8 with turbo

Edited on by SCAR392

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

97. Posted:

@SCAR392
There's a difference between releasing a product with buggy and unpolished firmware and releasing a product that's artificially limited. There is nothing to gain from making your product less attractive when it lacks competition for no reason other than to surprise people later on. There are good reasons why you'd release a product before the firmware is up to scratch. As you rightly said, people's opinions are made up pretty early and sometimes even before the details are announced. Why would you reinforce those views? Do you think people would even notice if you slipped in an update that magically makes it 3X as powerful later on?

There is no doubt in my mind that there will be better content for the Wii U as developers have more time with it. That'll have nothing to do with a magical CPU or GPU unlock. Frankly I really don't care how much the Wii U is capable of and am not really interested in your argument. I'm more interested in content.

Edited on by skywake

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

98. Posted:

@skywake
I wouldn't really call it artificially hindering the console. They just released it to have some sort of product available.
I'm actually looking forward to Xbox∞, too. Never the less, the games are most important, which I'm sure everyone that plays games will agree on.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

demonta4

99. Posted:

skywake wrote:

Oh, and if anyone wants those things why are they playing games on consoles anyway? Can I do my usual schtick and ask why you're not on a PC? Get some SSDs if you want fast loading times. Get a decent GPU if you want good graphics, you can do that now you don't have to wait for the PS4. If you want the CPU power for AI then get any PC because it'll almost surely have more CPU power than it knows what to do with in a game. What are you waiting for? Are you blind?

When I first bought my first nintendo console(3ds)i wanted power and innovation.Its power doesn't stand up to vita but its still good for a handheld.I like the wii u but it seems nintendo is focusing on that gamepad more than the accual console.I want both not one over another.

Current game standing
1–nintendo
2–sony
3–who even cares about them

AuthorMessage
Avatar

banacheck

100. Posted:

skywake wrote:

There is no doubt in my mind that there will be better content for the Wii U as developers have more time with it. That'll have nothing to do with a magical CPU or GPU unlock. Frankly I really don't care how much the Wii U is capable of

I think everyone can agree with new games like Watch Dogs, The Wondrful 101, GTA V, Dark Souls2 or what ever games your into. It is actually a great time be a gamer with a new console out and another two on the way, we will all see bigger and better games as dev's take advantage of each hardware, and that's what excites me as i'm sure it does for most of you.

banacheck