One thing that i just Wish would become the standard Next gen would be for all titles to be locked in at 60 frames per second. Why? Well aside from 60fps looking miles better than 30, it's displayed properly on HDTV's. However if you pop any 30fps game in and fire it up, you'll end up getting a nasty motion effect. When panning the camera around or usually just anything, the environment begins to slightly double. It's more evident on plasma, where as LCD's blur even more yet they kind of hide the effect and instead things look a bit smeary. since plasma's boast superior motion that ugly doubleing effect reveals it's self a lot more and it's pretty botched looking.

Nintendo's Wii games however are usually 60fps all the time. It's usually 3rd party devlopers who are trying to push the graphics and detail get locked down to 30fps like Resident Evil for example.

I was toying around with Pikmin NPC the other day for the wii on both my LCD and plasma, and while the brightness, progressive scan and vivid colors were a step up on my LCD, the motion handeling was a giant downgrade. If it were running at 60fps I'd have no real problem, but 30fps kind of butchers the motion. Smearyness in full force!

well nintendo with the wii didn't have anyway to Max out graphics or have alot going on screen or could. so yeah 60fps was a lock. now lets see them do something a tad bit more complex.

also as much hate people around here to get one ubisoft has a company policy that all big budget games must be 60fps and at least 720p.

Some things will just never change .

I cannot see the Wii U being more powerful than the next ps/xbox - it WILL probably be weaker, but does it matter? I mean we will get all the usual games we have come to expect from Nintendo - and its value for money

@WaveBoy you are always referring to one or might be two type of games, but it happens that there are more. In the example I provided with ArmA2 a single MOD for the game might require more RAM than then total of a current PS3, a single mission might require several PS3 working in battery and might be that mission requires several large MODs too, and all this using minimal graphic detail settings. But if you dont care about CPU because you want just to focus on 2D sidescrollers or almost on-rails basic scripted games like RE, then of course only gameplay, controls and graphics count. Control innovations will not help me to play Civilization V better than with a mouse, neither Lock-On better than with a full HOTAS+Pedals, nor Empire Total War better than with mouse + keyboard, but I guess you dont consider any of these as games, right (that supposing that you even know them).

Just a quick reminder: the Wii U's GPU will probably be capable of general purpose processing :3

Anyway, this doesn't matter too much for me to compare specs. The gap of this generation shouldn't be as wide as the last. As of today, selling a $500 system is a little more risky than it was in 2006.

@Mandoble: "I don't care for the Halo series. Therefore, I don't consider it a game." See how utterly daft that sounds in context? Just because WaveBoy has a preference in video games doesn't mean he naively neglects/refuses to acknowledge the other horizon of the gaming world.

KoMiCtUrTlE made an excellent point about the Direct X factor, so it reduces a lot my councern about it.

20% of raw power doesn't meant that you will used wisely, and like somebody says before they would be the same games but little bit prettiers. MS would'nt bring something innovate than the new controller of wiiU, the kinnect 2 can only go futter than a acurate motion reading or some imaginarie buttons, but the new wii U controller brings a lot of more probabilites.

Remenber playing ocarina of time 3D using the buttons of the 3ds but algo the touch screen and the gyroscope, then multiply that for 10 and you have the wiiU

GPU/Raw power > Gameplay