Backwards compatibility isn't the main reason, though. Nintendo has been using PowerPC since GCN. If anything, Nintendo is using PowerPC, because developers should be knowledgeable about it. Considering 3rd parties know how to use Xbox 360 to its fullest, but take months upon months of a delay to get a port running on Wii U, that should be a pretty clear indicator that Wii U is actually a very different machine. They have no clue how to support Wii U, hardware wise, content wise, and all of it relates to money, along with sales.
Nintendo chose to use PowerPC, but it ultimately doesn't effect the bottom line of what the Wii U can actually do. It's not that hard to realize that developers chose Xbox One and PS4 as priorities, simply because of the fact that PC has the ease of use and resources that are immediately available without as much effort. The last widely available PowerPC machines before Wii U, were Xbox 360 and PS3, so all that development that has happened from PC on a consistent basis, from the past 7-8 years only applies to x86.
@Jazzer94
It does matter, because they still hardly know how to port some games over. Watch Dogs has taken them 5 extra months to get developed for Wii U, and a year for Project Cars once they realized it was taking enough time to develop on x86, as it is. Regardless of the audience, it is still taking them a handful of time to get a game running on Wii U. Even if everyone in the world wanted Watch Dogs on Wii U, they still would have had to delay it, because that's how different the machine is from last gen, and 8th gen.
...I think this might be the most sensible of your comments I've ever read.
@Peach64
The Xbox One and PS4 didn't get a ton of PC ports, either. By the time those consoles came out, they were on the same page, because they were pushing PC and could now release their work on more consoles where it would actually matter. The PC version is practically the same. Also, they are not using PS4 code for games. It's the same code across both consoles, for the most part. They may take advantage of certain aspects of both machines, whether it be for Kinect or PS Eye, but otherwise it is the same. That is why games like AC Unity and Destiny are going to be the same. They aren't giving any specific console any special treatment.
In the entire scope of things, PowerPC makes alot more sense, because they don't have to directly compete with Xbox One and PS4 specs. If you haven't been paying attention, that's what's happening, and adding one more console would be pretty bullock. There's also the fact that PowerPC would have basically been buried without Nintendo's contribution to the market. Just imagine if there was no PowerPC this generation. That's like destroying over 20 years of technological knowledge if they never go back to it, which would have been even less likely if they wouldn't have continued PowerPC, now.
EDIT: Apple made the decision to abandon PowerPC hardware in 2005. They have no intent of ever returning.
Of course Nintendo should be blamed for it, it was not a secret that developers wanted all consoles to be x86 so porting would be cheaper....... Nintendo probably thought keeping backwards compatibility with the Wii (which probably would not have been possible if they jumped to x86) was more important than third party support..... they thought wrong
I think it's pretty obvious that whatever Nintendo did, third parties would bail anyway. They'll say the demographics are not there, just like they're saying now. Nobody really is saying that the Wii U isn't powerful enough. I think Batman was the only game they said that. Most after all are available on the 360 and PS3 and still didn't come to the Wii U, so it's an irrelevant point.
This. Third parties are probably just going to keep making excuses for why they don't want to put games on Nintendo consoles.
x86 is the type of processor architecture that PCs use (From the processor types 8086, 80286, 80386 and 80486, after that came the pentium and the lines between processor versions blurred a bit), and that means that porting to PCs becomes easier too, maybe that was a part of the consideration on the third parties' end...
Xbox One, PS4 and PC all use x86 which makes porting games to these platforms relatively easy.
Wii U uses PowerPC, which means porting PC/PS4/X1 games to the Wii U is more difficult as they essentially have to be rewritten.
It's similar to how many OS X programs had problems when Apple switched from PowerPC to x86.
It's related to the coding, and it is the reason some ports can be buggy - different architectures can mean that the entire code needs to be rewritten from scratch, which means lots more work on the development end. By having the same architecture, it makes the process of developing games easier. Games always get ported from a PC architecture to a console's, but X86 is already a PC architecture. So not only does it mean porting to other consoles is less costly, it also means development in general can be quicker and more effecient. Nintendo really got screwed by not going with x86, but to be fair, I doubt even Sony and Microsoft even figured they'd both be going with the same architecture - outside of rumors, it seemed more like great minds just happened to think alike.
There are drawbacks, obviously - by having a PC architecture, the PS4 and Xbox One are theoretically more likely to be hackable. I can't say this for sure, but I have a feeling the "always online" stuff Microsoft was going with was more of a pre-emptive measure to try and stop people from turning the Xbox into a Pirate machine...of course, now all they have to do is force regular updates down our throats...
Very interesting. Good to know, thanks all. I kind of figured it had something to do with the systems architecture but I didn't know how much of a difference it would make overall to cause a stir. Matter of fact, I didn't know it was that much of a issue with gamers.
A dying animal struggles, thrashes and howls in protest as its life torn from it. To see this in action, watch Animal Planet. The same thing happens when a video game is or isn't released. To see this in action, stay here.
Switch Friend Code: Sw-6105-4873-7122 | 3DS Friend Code: 1848-1733-3257 | My Nintendo: Ultraraichu | Nintendo Network ID: ultraraichu
Of course Nintendo should be blamed for it, it was not a secret that developers wanted all consoles to be x86 so porting would be cheaper....... Nintendo probably thought keeping backwards compatibility with the Wii (which probably would not have been possible if they jumped to x86) was more important than third party support..... they thought wrong
I think it's pretty obvious that whatever Nintendo did, third parties would bail anyway. They'll say the demographics are not there, just like they're saying now. Nobody really is saying that the Wii U isn't powerful enough. I think Batman was the only game they said that. Most after all are available on the 360 and PS3 and still didn't come to the Wii U, so it's an irrelevant point.
This. Third parties are probably just going to keep making excuses for why they don't want to put games on Nintendo consoles.
Why? What reason is there to do such a thing? You don't abandon a gold mine if there's still gold to be found.
Of course Nintendo should be blamed for it, it was not a secret that developers wanted all consoles to be x86 so porting would be cheaper....... Nintendo probably thought keeping backwards compatibility with the Wii (which probably would not have been possible if they jumped to x86) was more important than third party support..... they thought wrong
I think it's pretty obvious that whatever Nintendo did, third parties would bail anyway. They'll say the demographics are not there, just like they're saying now. Nobody really is saying that the Wii U isn't powerful enough. I think Batman was the only game they said that. Most after all are available on the 360 and PS3 and still didn't come to the Wii U, so it's an irrelevant point.
This. Third parties are probably just going to keep making excuses for why they don't want to put games on Nintendo consoles.
Why? What reason is there to do such a thing? You don't abandon a gold mine if there's still gold to be found.
Nintendo consoles aren't a gold mine, currently. A series takes time to develop in a massive success no matter what console it is on. 3rd Parties released games on Wii U thinking it would reach high numbers (compared to Xbox One and Playstation 4) but they had built an audience on Microsoft and Sony platforms already meaning they would do better on those systems. Coming to Nintendo consoles with a sequel to a series that hasn't been on Nintendo consoles (at least home console) means they need to build up that audience which means they aren't going to reach those high sales numbers. So 3rd Parties left the system before building the fan base leaving many (myself included) potential fans behind. So it is a mix of Wii U owners not supporting 3rd Parties enough when they needed it and 3rd Parties didn't put in the effort to find new fans. There is no one person/company to blame here. It is a mix of a lot of different things. Once 360/PS3 are no longer supported the Wii U support wil likely increase but in the same way that the Wii got 3rd Party support, with spin-offs and shovelware games.
People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...
3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan
Of course Nintendo should be blamed for it, it was not a secret that developers wanted all consoles to be x86 so porting would be cheaper....... Nintendo probably thought keeping backwards compatibility with the Wii (which probably would not have been possible if they jumped to x86) was more important than third party support..... they thought wrong
I think it's pretty obvious that whatever Nintendo did, third parties would bail anyway. They'll say the demographics are not there, just like they're saying now. Nobody really is saying that the Wii U isn't powerful enough. I think Batman was the only game they said that. Most after all are available on the 360 and PS3 and still didn't come to the Wii U, so it's an irrelevant point.
This. Third parties are probably just going to keep making excuses for why they don't want to put games on Nintendo consoles.
Why? What reason is there to do such a thing? You don't abandon a gold mine if there's still gold to be found.
Nintendo consoles aren't a gold mine, currently. A series takes time to develop in a massive success no matter what console it is on. 3rd Parties released games on Wii U thinking it would reach high numbers (compared to Xbox One and Playstation 4) but they had built an audience on Microsoft and Sony platforms already meaning they would do better on those systems. Coming to Nintendo consoles with a sequel to a series that hasn't been on Nintendo consoles (at least home console) means they need to build up that audience which means they aren't going to reach those high sales numbers. So 3rd Parties left the system before building the fan base leaving many (myself included) potential fans behind. So it is a mix of Wii U owners not supporting 3rd Parties enough when they needed it and 3rd Parties didn't put in the effort to find new fans. There is no one person/company to blame here. It is a mix of a lot of different things. Once 360/PS3 are no longer supported the Wii U support wil likely increase but in the same way that the Wii got 3rd Party support, with spin-offs and shovelware games.
That's his point, if there was a good amount of money to be made third parties would be porting games..
Apple made the decision to abandon PowerPC hardware in 2005. They have no intent of ever returning.
Apple decided not to use PowerPC because what they do is more oriented towards general-purpose operations. PowerPC, when tasked with something specific for its design, usually outperforms x86, but x86 is meant for the jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none ideology, where it can do well with a full range of applications. PowerPC is a master in some, but falls short in other areas. For purposes of gaming, it's great, but you can't expect much else without paying for it (because development of PowerPC only retains what is needed, thus reducing the cost which is already higher than x86).
Based on this, my understanding of why Sony and MS decided to go with x86 is because their machines were designed with non-gaming and indirect-gaming functionality in mind.
Discostew
3DS Friend Code: 4425-1477-0127 | Nintendo Network ID: Discostew
There isn't a good amount of money to be made, cause they don't have that many fans on Wii U currently. They need to build their fanbase first. The first games that are trying to reach a new audience aren't going to do as well as the other systems, where their fans are. So there is money to be found on Nintendo Systems, they just need to build up their fanbase on that system first. Without a fanbase they won't make money, which all the games 3rd Parties have releassed on Wii U so far were released to a small fanbase. That is my point. Call of Duty didn't become the best selling series in the industry overnight, it had a fanbase that it built up through many games over many years.
@Discostew
I think it just got too hard for Apple to do, in a primarily x86 focused development environment. Nintendo isn't trying to compete with PCs, and Apple is, so their decision is based on that. I don't think Xbox One(at least) was based on non-gaming and indirect-gaming, as you say, though. If that were the case, OG Xbox would have ran more programs, besides just video games, DVDs, and CDs.
Xbox existing in the first place, is because Microsoft specifically wanted to enter the gaming market, and all the knowledge they had was from what they got from PC. That's why Windows 10 is going to be a thing on Xbox One, and Windows 8 basically came from Xbox 360's dashboard.
Sony wanted to be in gaming, too, but I think their goals changed after PS1. PS2 and PS3 both had Linux. Microsoft has just barely been trying to get Windows on Xbox One. So the only way non-gaming and indirect-gaming type functionality could have arisen, is if they got those ideas from somewhere else to begin with; aka: PC. That still doesn't change that the main goal of any of these consoles is gaming, regardless of where they got the tech from.
Qwest
3DS Friend Code: 4253-3737-8064 | Nintendo Network ID: Children
There isn't a good amount of money to be made, cause they don't have that many fans on Wii U currently. They need to build their fanbase first. The first games that are trying to reach a new audience aren't going to do as well as the other systems, where their fans are. So there is money to be found on Nintendo Systems, they just need to build up their fanbase on that system first. Without a fanbase they won't make money, which all the games 3rd Parties have releassed on Wii U so far were released to a small fanbase. That is my point. Call of Duty didn't become the best selling series in the industry overnight, it had a fanbase that it built up through many games over many years.
Not completely true games like COD and FIFA have had constant releases on Wii and GCN where they sold enough each time for publishers to keep bringing more problem is fans have moved on to more viable platforms to get those kinds of games.
There isn't a good amount of money to be made, cause they don't have that many fans on Wii U currently. They need to build their fanbase first. The first games that are trying to reach a new audience aren't going to do as well as the other systems, where their fans are. So there is money to be found on Nintendo Systems, they just need to build up their fanbase on that system first. Without a fanbase they won't make money, which all the games 3rd Parties have releassed on Wii U so far were released to a small fanbase. That is my point. Call of Duty didn't become the best selling series in the industry overnight, it had a fanbase that it built up through many games over many years.
Not completely true games like COD and FIFA have had constant releases on Wii and GCN where they sold enough each time for publishers to keep bringing more problem is fans have moved on to more viable platforms to get those kinds of games.
Meaning they have less fans on the Wii U, which is what I am saying.
People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...
3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan
There isn't a good amount of money to be made, cause they don't have that many fans on Wii U currently. They need to build their fanbase first. The first games that are trying to reach a new audience aren't going to do as well as the other systems, where their fans are. So there is money to be found on Nintendo Systems, they just need to build up their fanbase on that system first. Without a fanbase they won't make money, which all the games 3rd Parties have releassed on Wii U so far were released to a small fanbase. That is my point. Call of Duty didn't become the best selling series in the industry overnight, it had a fanbase that it built up through many games over many years.
Not completely true games like COD and FIFA have had constant releases on Wii and GCN where they sold enough each time for publishers to keep bringing more problem is fans have moved on to more viable platforms to get those kinds of games.
Meaning they have less fans on the Wii U, which is what I am saying.
Because the majority of fans are either on other consoles and don't want to play an inferior version or are happy with last gen still so really there isn't anything to nurture.
Of course Nintendo should be blamed for it, it was not a secret that developers wanted all consoles to be x86 so porting would be cheaper....... Nintendo probably thought keeping backwards compatibility with the Wii (which probably would not have been possible if they jumped to x86) was more important than third party support..... they thought wrong
I think it's pretty obvious that whatever Nintendo did, third parties would bail anyway. They'll say the demographics are not there, just like they're saying now. Nobody really is saying that the Wii U isn't powerful enough. I think Batman was the only game they said that. Most after all are available on the 360 and PS3 and still didn't come to the Wii U, so it's an irrelevant point.
This. Third parties are probably just going to keep making excuses for why they don't want to put games on Nintendo consoles.
Why? What reason is there to do such a thing? You don't abandon a gold mine if there's still gold to be found.
Because they can't take the same approach that they normally would with Nintendo's consoles or fanbase. You can't just put Madden or CoD on a Nintendo console and expect it to sell like wildfire like they would on Microsoft and Sony's consoles, Nintendo fans generally expect more than that. And sadly, that's more effort than most of the third parties are willing to make.
There isn't a good amount of money to be made, cause they don't have that many fans on Wii U currently. They need to build their fanbase first. The first games that are trying to reach a new audience aren't going to do as well as the other systems, where their fans are. So there is money to be found on Nintendo Systems, they just need to build up their fanbase on that system first. Without a fanbase they won't make money, which all the games 3rd Parties have releassed on Wii U so far were released to a small fanbase. That is my point. Call of Duty didn't become the best selling series in the industry overnight, it had a fanbase that it built up through many games over many years.
Not completely true games like COD and FIFA have had constant releases on Wii and GCN where they sold enough each time for publishers to keep bringing more problem is fans have moved on to more viable platforms to get those kinds of games.
Meaning they have less fans on the Wii U, which is what I am saying.
Because the majority of fans are either on other consoles and don't want to play an inferior version or are happy with last gen still so really there isn't anything to nurture.
The current fans are in those places. I still feel like there is plenty of room for fans to grow in the Wii U market but without them supporting the system those people will continue not to be fans of theirs.
People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...
3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan
It's because of the Wii. If Nintendo actually made a new system in 2006, instead of giving the GameCube a makeover, a different name and controller, the developers at Nintendo would have had experience with HD gaming, so the move on to their 8th gen system would be okay. Since, they didn't do that and their developers have no experience with HD gaming, they couldn't have just jump all the way to x86, that would have been too much work for them, so they just went with standard HD.
But now that their developers have experience with HD gaming, their 9th gen console, Wii P, should be just as powerful as the PS5 and XBox Tree Sixty
@Jazzer94
Except that saying there is a more viable platform is flawed. We could just as easily say that 3rd parties are incompetent for releasing gimped games on Wii U. The enrire reason why I personally didn't buy Madden 13 on Wii U, was specifically because the game was gimped in comparison to even last gen platforms. That was EA's fault, not Nintendo's.
Qwest
3DS Friend Code: 4253-3737-8064 | Nintendo Network ID: Children
In short, it's the kind of parts included in it. Traditionally, PCs use x86 architecture, and then the format that the game is in is changed to work on consoles. This generation Sony and Microsoft decided to use x86 making porting games from PC (what they are typically designed for) much simpler. Nintendo decided not to use x86 and that makes porting games harder, resulting in less third party support.
My SD Card with the game on it is just as physical as your cartridge with the game on it.
I love Nintendo, that's why I criticize them so harshly.
Why? What reason is there to do such a thing? You don't abandon a gold mine if there's still gold to be found.
Because they can't take the same approach that they normally would with Nintendo's consoles or fanbase. You can't just put Madden or CoD on a Nintendo console and expect it to sell like wildfire like they would on Microsoft and Sony's consoles, Nintendo fans generally expect more than that. And sadly, that's more effort than most of the third parties are willing to make.
Not the answer I was expecting. That actually makes sense. :/ I am very disappointed by the amount of AAA developers who aren't taking the initiative to try different things with the Wii U. It's like we were saying, though, new things aren't gonna make a lot of money. But there are ways around that, which they aren't even attempting.
I mostly just want more companies to try more "Child of Light" style digital games. I can live without the big stuff, most of it isn't much fun to me in the first place. But the smaller projects that are less risky would be worth it if they just tried. Hell, they're willing to try on other platforms...
@Jazzer94
Except that saying there is a more viable platform is flawed. We could just as easily say that 3rd parties are incompetent for releasing gimped games on Wii U. The enrire reason why I personally didn't buy Madden 13 on Wii U, was specifically because the game was gimped in comparison to even last gen platforms. That was EA's fault, not Nintendo's.
You're talking as if the majority of Madden's fanbase is highly knowledgable about games...they're probably more likely to know who John Madden is than knowing what features are actually missing from Madden 13.
Forums
Topic: People are too quick to blame Nintendo for not going X86
Posts 21 to 40 of 49
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.