News Article

Iwata Expects Wii U to Last a Generation

Posted by Thomas Whitehead

Microsoft doesn't seem to agree

An obsession that has plagued video gaming since its earliest days is power, whether it was the 'BIT' wars of the 1990s or the current-day complexities of graphics processors. Wii has been a staggering success that has faded away in its twilight years, arguably because its lack of power has deprived it of many big multi-platform titles; a fate Nintendo's keen to avoid with Wii U.

When addressing concerns from Nintendo shareholders, Iwata stated that the additional capabilities of Wii U and the smaller visual differences in HD visuals meant that Wii U wouldn't be overwhelmed by more powerful machines.

We cannot promise that the Wii U will never be excluded from multiplatform software for eternity, but we can at least assure you that the Wii U will not have such a big difference as the Wii had in comparison to how, on other platforms, developers could expect very different graphic capabilities of generating HD-applicable high-resolution graphics. Other companies might launch a next-generation console with more power, but we don’t necessarily think that the difference between the Wii U and such console will be as drastic as what you felt it was between the Wii and the other consoles because there will be fewer and fewer differentiators in graphics. Naturally some consumers are very sensitive about such a small difference in graphics so that we will make efforts to make the most of the performance of the Wii U to keep up with technological innovations and not to make the system out-of-date soon. However, as the structure of the product called the Wii U is as if we are including both a video game console and a handheld device, if we were not careful about how luxurious both of them were, we could end up having to offer the price of the two hardware systems combined, which would not be an acceptable price for the consumers. We had to design it by balancing the performance and the costs.

I am not sure this is an appropriate expression, but video game consoles have long been “parasites” of TV sets at home. In other words, game consoles have used TV sets in a family instead of being equipped with their own screen. However, the Wii U will be the first console free from TV sets, in which you can play the Wii U while someone else is watching TV or you yourself can watch TV while using the Wii U. As you can experience deeper entertainment with both the Wii U GamePad and the TV screen, we would like to enrich it but, at the same time, we hope to furnish it with games you can enjoy only with the Wii U GamePad. In addition, games on two screens are not just the same with what we did for the Nintendo DS. As the TV screen can be distant from the Wii U GamePad, not like the Nintendo 3DS, we can offer different options for use. Also, in multiplayer games, a player with the Wii U GamePad will play a different role from those with Wii Remote controllers. We are thinking of what we call “asymmetric game play,” in which players have different roles in one game, like in Tag. The player with the Wii U GamePad will be able to know what other players are doing when they are playing on the TV screen. The Wii U GamePad will work as a window where you can communicate with other players in their living rooms. We say that the Wii U GamePad could be a “Social Window,” or a window to link your living rooms to others’.

Not to be outdone in this "my processor's faster than your processor" debate, Microsoft's Phil Spencer suggested to that Wii U, graphically, was simply catching up to Xbox 360.

I think their Pro Controller makes a lot of sense with the platform they've built. They are building a platform that is effectively a 360 when you think of graphical capability. Now they are really making an on-ramp for the back catalog of games that are on 360. It is easy for those games to move over the Wii U. They've moved the buttons around, and they've made a controller that feels familiar for 360 gamers, so I get why they are putting those pieces together. I would have loved to see Zelda or Metroid or some of my favorite Nintendo franchises, which I didn't see.

It's an argument that Nintendo has faced since unveiling the SD Wii to the world, and we don't expect it to finish any time soon.


From the web

User Comments (109)



Lan said:

What a cocky douche. I'm glad Nintendo's people aren't like that.



darkgamer001 said:

This obsession with power and graphics is something I'll never be able to understand.
We've reached a point where devs are almost forced to spend insane amounts of time, money and resources for minimal increases in performance...and yet many so-called 'hardcore' gamers are oblivious to that fact, due to their single minded obsession with shiny graphics.



Lew3107 said:

This graphics war is pathetic. Graphics shouldn't be the main point of buying a video games console. I own a Wii and an Xbox 360. I have 19 Wii games atm, over the course of it I have owned over 60. Want me to tell you how many 360 games I own? FOUR. Forza 4, Naruto UNS2, FIFA 12 & Street Fighter 4. And that's been that over the past 4 years. I haven't touched my 360 since March.

Graphics don't point my view one way, gameplay does, and it's pathetic that Microsoft think graphics should be the decisive factor. Besides, modern TV's only go up to 1080p; Wii U supports it so how much further can you go? Creativity and innovation build up a console, not raw power. I'm definitely buying the Wii U at some stage, whether it's weaker than the PS4 and Xbox 3 or not, and I'm sure as hell Microsoft will never get another penny from me. So you can keep you high-resolution-more-realistic-than-life-shooting game on your console with this much RAM, this much ROM with this many cores, because I'm fine with less realistic Nintendo games, thanks.



erv said:

That settles it then. The wiiU is awesome and the competition knows it.

Or not. I'm still going to buy it



H_Hunter said:

Phil Spencer:
"They are building a platform that is effectively a 360 when you think of graphical capability" {Don't forget the creativity Nintendo have that you guys are lacking}

"I would have loved to see Zelda or Metroid or some of my favorite Nintendo franchises, which I didn't see" {What a weasel! you left everything they offered and focused on the missing!}

someone needs some smacking!



-KwB- said:

@darkgamer001 It is true !! Gameplay on Nintendo is waaaay better than the other consoles.
@Lew3107 I had the same with my xBox, only bought 1 game for it, sold it. After that had a PS3, only for COD and never bought an other game.



GameLord08 said:

This console war banter is absolutely pathetic, if you ask me. That Spencer bloke also seems to be rather cocky about it, and it's pretty annoying. The Wii U is not attempting to idolise the 360; it's a different stand-alone next-gen console. Everybody needs to start respecting that, and stop all this comparison, in my opinion. It's very immature.



luminalace said:

While the supposed hardcore care about about console power, the number of developers are shrinking fast and the amount of really successful games can be counted on two hands. Next gen means bigger budgets and more bankrupt companies! The gaming industry as we know it is heading into oblivion and few will survive! We will all be gaming on Appler products if we don't looj out! Thankfully Nintendo know how to make great games and live within it's means.



kyuubikid213 said:

First of all, I don't see how "catching up to 360" is a bad thing. Once Wii U comes out it will be able to crank out 1080p HD. Similar to when the Wii came out at SD, HD is now in most homes. The only way Sony and Microsoft could make a system with dramatically better graphics is to create a "new" resolution that borderlines expensive.

Secondly, he didn't see Zelda? What about the reveal last year? And if he was talking about the launch lineup, it'll be here down the line.

Lastly, I'm glad to hear he likes the idea of Wii U.



nindocrash said:

Battles over graphics have been over, and done, since 2k9 for me. animation, art style, and game play is what drives modern gaming forward. In my opinion.



Samholy said:

some say they cant understand the urge to graphic power in consoles.

take a game like skyrim or infamous. they need a lot of power to render huge environnement while keeping the graphic quality. huge spaces is one thing about power.

take a game like battlefield 3 where they truly need to render down on the consoles because its huge, realistic and the environnement is destructible at its best. Environnement interaction possibilities in a huge terrain is also something that need power.

take a game like god of war 3, where they need power to achieve fluid action and spectacular effects real-time.

take a game like uncharted . the environnement is rich, luxurious,heavily detailed and mostly interactive. all these objects,details, realism needs power.

now combine all of these together...
i dont want power for graphic beauty only. i mostly want it to experience huge environments and freedom to roam in these. Beeing awed by a spectacular scenery on the way is always a joy.



Samholy said:

hahahaha im already sold to sony

i love nintendo for their handheld consoles now. i still remember my snes with joy and tears, but consoles after this one were mostly deceiving. n64 didnt impressed me much else than 1 mario,1 zelda ans smash bros.
gamecube? smash melee and.... zelda ?
wii... smash brawl and... mario ? zelda didnt even impressed me on this one...geez
im not gonna buy a console for 2 or 3 games ,even as masterpieces they are.

stop the home consoles already, and focus on handheld and games !!!!



edcomics said:

I don't think Spencer's off-base here. The difference between Wii and Xbox 360 or PS3 is similar to the difference between the NES and SNES. Nintendo's allowed itself to be left behind on graphics and power, while focusing on gimmicks. While those gimmicks are fun, few games truly make the most of them. Thus, we're brought back to a comparison between the consoles. When The Force Unleashed came out, the Wii version was essentially the PS2 version of the game. PS2. PS2. For someone with only a Wii, they're getting an inferior version of the game because of the Wii's limitations. Since the WiiU isn't making a huge leap in the trouble areas, Nintendo may get left behind once again. Iwata seems to underestimate future advances in HD graphics — just as Nintendo underestimated the desire for HD in the first place. Nintendo just seems to be content with being adequate these days.



UnawareQuagsire said:

@Samholy "i dont want power for graphic beauty only. i mostly want it to experience huge environments and freedom to roam in these. Beeing awed by a spectacular scenery on the way is always a joy."

This, this, this.

It's impossible to play a truly immersive experience on Nintendo current Nintendo platforms due to hardware limitations.

One good game that it's extensive is Xenoblade on Wii, but nowhere as good as immersion goes on Skyrim.

your image was inappropriate for Nintendo Life as per our Community Rules, please be more careful in the future — TBD



edcomics said:

Yeah, that's pretty much how it's been for me with N64, Gamecube and even Wii. Zelda games always draw me in and justify the purchase, but what after that? There are a few gems here and there, but there needs to be more. I suppose that's a different issue than graphics and power, though. If Nintendo was cranking out more blockbuster-quality material, it would be easier to overlook graphical limitations.



shingi_70 said:

Didn't know being confident about your platform made you a cocky douche.

And nothing that was shown at E3 looked good at all. Everything looked like it could have been run on Wii. That and Microsoft and Sony aren't afraid to take a loss to make powerful hardware ghat will last.



nindocrash said:

@edcomics yeah that is true... my Wii has disappointed me in under porting games like those. also, my 3DS is my best owned handheld. I'm still hopeful for monster hunter though



SilentHunter382 said:

What a douche. Microsoft the Wii U is more powerful then the 360 and it will have the tasty nintendo exclusives. You only released your smart glass app because of the Wii U controller.

If I remember correctly Microsoft your are not going to bother about exclusives and focusing on multiplats. So if this is true why would people buy your console. If the games are going to be on other console and those other consoles offer exclusive and your system doesn't, why would they buy it.



Wheels2050 said:

Come on, people. I know this is a Nintendo fan site, but blindly running to defend Nintendo isn't helping anybody.

  • There are many ways to increase the quality of graphics without changing the resolution. I don't know why you're even confusing the two. Better textures, higher polygon counts, all that can be improved.
  • Also, greater power allows different game experiences, which I've argued before and others have argued here. Graphics are a reasonable metric of a console's power, which can indicate the console's capabilities in other areas. More RAM allows more detailed game worlds, perhaps with things like destructible environments, better CPUs allow more complicated AI. That sort of thing.
  • "Catching up" to the 360 IS a bad thing. You know, since Microsoft is expected to release a new console within a couple of years. What happens to multiplatform titles then?

If the Wii U really is only as powerful as the 360 and PS3, the lack of future proofing will hurt it in a few years' time, and it'll be the Wii all over again. I think Nintendo struck gold with the Wii, and managed to increase their audience by an amazing factor, but I don't see it happening with the Wii U. This time around they need to focus on the people who are going to upgrade from their Wii, and I dare say they are in the minority. They're also an entirely different market.

It'll be an interesting few years. Nintendo may have backed themselves into a corner with the Wii U, but it remains to be seen what happens.



Not-Another-Ad said:

I have just travelled back from the future,and the Wii U was a gigantic flop,and Nintendo went the way of SEGA.



sebman30 said:

wouldnt you just love it if the wiiu hardware pretty much blew every other console away i know i would smash my xbox which i rarely ever use



NintyMan said:

You can have the most beautiful graphics, but the game will still be bad if the controls are sloppy. Graphics are not the most important thing; gameplay is.

Iwata is right in saying that even if the next Microsoft and Sony consoles have more power, the Wii U will still have enough to not have as wide of a graphics gap as the Wii had. So what if Wii U is catching up to XBox 360? It will still have 1080p HD.

Just because the other guys have more power doesn't mean that thrid-party developers should shun the Wii U when it can give them a different perspective. The Wii U gamepad would make their games play differently in a unique way instead of having it on other more powerful consoles where it would look shinier and that's it.



Nintendokim said:

Thing is I really love nintendo, they are all about game play. with the wii I got my mario my zelda my metroid. BUT something was missing, as a hardcore gamer I need more(not talking about stupid FPS). so I had to buy an XBOX to get RG fix, the witcher, amular, dragon age and dont forget all the amazing XBLA games. I really hope the wii u can fill the empty hole cause I sucks ass to have to play all those amazing tittles on a crappy xbox



Wheels2050 said:

@Nintendokim: If, as you claim, gameplay is the be all and end all, why does it matter what you're playing the game on? How is your Xbox 'crappy' if it facilitates you playing your 'amazing' XBLA games?



Nintendokim said:

@wheels2050: do u really have to ask that question? first of all I love games but I dont think the 360 is a good platform for me. (my opinion) wierd OS with to much adds, the paying for gold membership, sure I love a lot of the games but I just wish nintendo had the opportunity and the support to do more of the same. for me SNES and N64 are the best consoles ever.



Nintendokim said:

(notice that I dont even mention hardware capabilities, graphics just arent important to me)




Well, the Wii U is technically similar to the Xbox 360. Then again, the Nintendo staff and Spencer have different philosophies on video game console designs




@Wheels2050 Let's not forget about the next generation console pricing, for all of the console manufacturers seem to be in a sticky situattion. I honestly believe that the Xbox and PS4 will be very expensive if they really push the graphical and processing power. As a matter of fact, it'd be hard to compete with their own consoles. I'm also worried about the costs of game development from this point on.



EvansLegends said:

@bobbiKat Yeah, I don't understand how Microsoft and Sony plan to create new consoles to follow up on the momentum of their predecessors the way gamers expect without breaking the bank. They must be affordable for consumers, AND creators. I also don't see much on Xbox360 or PS3 where a radical improvement is necessary or even possible.

By the way, it doesn't make sense for Microsoft to say that Wii U won't do well when both Microsoft and Sony have jumped on board with Wii U in the streaming and cross-play departments.



Wheels2050 said:

@Nintendokim: Well, yes, I do have to ask. You say that gameplay is all that matters, but then claim a platform that provides great gameplay is crappy. Note I'm not mentioning graphics either.

@BobbiKat: Yes, pricing is an issue. However, note that we still don't know the Wii U pricing. For all we know, it could be quite high (particularly due to the addition of the gamepad).

@EvansLegends: I don't know - it's not like there are new PC games coming out or anything! (end sarcasm).



JettiBlue said:

For me graphics do matter, to some degree at least. I still think Nintendo gameplay is often superior to what others have to offer, but I also enjoy some baddonkey beautiful HD grafics (I love my Xbox360!). So I do wish for the Wii U to be noticably stronger than current HD gen. Also of course for it to not be left out again in a few years. But Iwata wouldnt say it so clearly that this will not be the case, if it wasnt so. That Microsoft bloke is a bit full, how can he even know how powerful the console is really? He doesnt have one...



arrmixer said:

After reading all the comments, I believe have shulk's sight would be priceless at the moment...

However, I sympathize with the gamer who has his xbox for his rpg fix because I almost bought one just for that reason!!! Didn't do it because of $$$ (not worth it for me) (thought about upgrading my video card but no....)

I'm just going to stick to my guns and buy the wii U and just "see" what happens....

I honestly getting a little annoyed by all the speculative news.. can't wait for the holiday season to actually "see" what nintendo has in mind....

I also don't see the next gen really beng next gen... Unless Micro and Sony want to lose on $$$$ ..not happening.. too much pressure in this economy to simply say "let's have a losing business model".... but again let's "see"....



FonistofCruxis said:

@UnawareQuagsire I was fine with Samholy's post as he was pointing out the other advantages of more power but your post and that stupid comic of yours is ridiculous! First of all, you're implying that a game needs to have advanced realistic graphics to have a good, deep and immersive story. So that would mean that the Professor Layton series, the Ace attorney series and all the JRPGs released on consoles before the 7th generation, on the DS or games that aren't as realistic can't have deep stories and characters just because they don't have all these new advancements.

Also, just because a game doesn't have a deep story or a massive world to explore doesn't make it a worse game or a 'shallow' game. As well as finding games like the ones I mentioned in my first point immersive, I've found other games like Super Mario galaxy immersive too but if you can't enjoy games if they don't have all these advancements then that's sad and its your loss for missing out on so many great games.



JettiBlue said:

@arrmixer: agree, it is less likely in these times that either M or Sony will release super-high tech consoles for a loss like they did with the current gen. Too risky and developers are already now getting in trouble for too high development costs of HD games. Of course only time will tell, and Sony's Jack Tretton said with PS4 they wanna be again "the best", but I dont expect a huge lap either.



Nintendokim said:

@L4DYK0M1C: you really think nintendo will fail? history shows otherwise my friend

@Wheels2050: I see were you coming from, but I actually prefere a nintendo console. (it may be immpossible) But I hope for a nintendo console that can do all the above. (again my opinion)



Nintendokim said:

This is Nintendolife after all, so if you have something bad to say about nintendo its pretty clear you come to this site to troll just saying... (Heia Norge)



rjejr said:

I've been bashing a lot of what Nintendo has said lately - especially almost anything that comes out of Reggie's mouth as he just seems so clueless - but I totally agree w/ what Iwata says here. Here's what he says - the Wii U will be able to last the entire next generation b/c the HD graphics limit of 1080p tvs has been reached so it doesn't matter how much more powerful the Xbox720/PS4 are than the Wii U b/c (and here's the important part) the Wii U will be much closer to the new systems than the Wii was to the Xbox360 and PS3. And I agree w/ this. Almost anything multiplatform between the other 2 will be portable to the Wii U.

As for the Xbox720/PS4 price differences w/ the Wii U keep this in mind - the PS3 was expensive due to blu-ray player and HDD. It sells now for $250 w/ those. Any additional bump up in price for the PS4 will be for CPU and GPU as I don't see a move to another disc format nor do I see them going SSD. So don't expect another $500 or $600 launch. A $400 PS4 migth look good compared to a $300 or $350 Wii U. The $250 Wii sold well b/c it was half the price of the other 2. Half won't happen again.



Nintendokim said:

from a logical standpoint: there is no way MS or sony would price a new console way above the wii u, that doesnt make sense. either u wait (if u prefer a xbox or playstation) or u grab a wii u. its that simple



Savino said:

So MS guy loves some Metroid!!
Smart guy, I should say.... smart guy!!!



Nintendokim said:

@savino: if you refering to me, then I will say metroid is the best francise ever, and I mean EVER. nintendo is my favoritt game makers by far....



Gridatttack said:

Meh. Graphics aren't all. However, as people fail to realize that, other companies will exploit that and get $$$. Really, they are some atari2600/NES/Megadrive games that are better games that some of today games



WaxxyOne said:

Wow, Microsoft claiming that the pro controller is essentially copying the 360 design is one of the most arrogant and misleading statements I've ever heard from them. Sorry, Microsoft, who was it that introduced the world to analogue shoulder buttons? Or digital shoulder buttons? Analog sticks on a mainstream gaming console? A force-feedback "rumble" feature? 1st-party wireless?

How about you stuff it and come back when you've managed to come up with a single successful innovation? If you're lucky, NIntendo will keep designing new awesome things that you can steal with the following machine.



AVahne said:

Didn't think Microsoft is so cocky. Judging the Wii U's power simply because of early footage and because it'll be getting many ports at first? He might have insider knowledge of Nintendo's console somehow that we don't have, but I doubt he really understands it.
And Nintendo copying the 360 controller and moving the buttons around? The ergonomic design was mostly copied (though all the E3 footage I've seen makes the controller look longer than the official image posted on the Internet), but Nintendo did not "move any buttons around". It's already known to informed gamers that Microsoft and Sony were the ones to move the buttons around.



Nintendoro said:

Let's face it, Nintendo is not expecting Wii U to have life cycle as long as nextbox or ps4. They knew this before they know it now. Just like with every other system previously. We'll probably get to see their next system in another six years again. Who knows? For the moment we should all prepare to enter Wii U era and enjoy it while it lasts.



AVahne said:

I agree. I've been wondering: If those people are supposedly "hard-core" and care so much about graphics, why not just build a gaming PC? A budget PC for $500 (what I just built a couple months ago) will run games on higher settings and at a higher framerate than a PS360.
I know some people will complain about how they don't know how to build one or that it'll cost them $1k+. But if you're one of those people, then you're really not a "hard-core" gamer at all.

Note: My definition of a hard-core gamer is someone who games for long periods of time or someone who is very dedicated to a certain game. The definition used in my above paragraphs is a very twisted one that floats around the Internet.



AVahne said:

Nintendo has never expected any of their consoles to go beyond 6 years. Their console cycle is usually 5-6 years anyway. I'm actually surprised the Wii has been going for 6 years instead of 5, if I remember correctly it's the second Nintendo home console to make it that long. First one was NES I think, so that should make Wii U the modern SNES. The naming scheme is also similar to NES and SNES. Hoping WIi U WILL be the modern SNES with lots of first party and third party support.



AVahne said:

One thing is, we still have no idea what the Wii U's power actually is. All we have to go by are two pretty muted E3s and words from respected devs supporting the system and random, unknown "devs" who spout whatever controversial rumors will get the most hits.



Hokori said:

So true I think Nintendos least lively system besides the virtual boy was the GBA



K1LLEGAL said:

@Wheels2050 Wow after reading all the comments; yours have been the only non-biased and honest ones. I don't care that this is a Nintendo fansite - people calling Phil Spencer (from Microsoft) a weasel after that comment need to grow up and realise he makes a good point.

I understand the argument of gameplay over graphics; but when the Wii U is lacking in power it won't be able to run certain multiplatform games to their best capabilities. Look at Dead Rising for instance. Whether you are a fan of the game or not; the 360's power allowed the game to show hundreds of zombies on screen at once; yet the Wii port got all kinds of shafted because the Wii didn't know how to handle that kind of thing. That's not a problem with the graphics; it's a problem with the power.

Also YES Sony and Microsoft can offer a lot better graphics and performance without even touching the current resolutions they use. They are not the same thing. Look at HD remakes; they are upped to 720p (HD) but still feature the same graphics that they did originally. Not hard to just do some research before you post a completely biased - and factually wrong - post.



Mandoble said:

Every time Iwata opens his mouth Nintendo shareholders get in panic. The WiiU is not even out and you have Nintendo in defensive and giving excuses. If power is not important, then why Nintendo is trying to catch up with the others, and why the others will try to catch up with PC? Two years ago you have the fanboys saying nobody needs HD, now all of them are allucinating after watching an HD Zelda demo, and 10 years later it will happen the same. You guys should keep playing SNES forever.



Nintendoro said:

Agreed. It'll blow our socks off no matter how powerful the specs are. Once we have this shiny thing under our TVs, with that controller in the arms, nothing will matter then. I simply can't wait any longer !!!!



PatcherStation said:

Every console should have a lot of power and a lot of great games, the likes of the Wii for example didn't have that. The next gen console war will all be about power and games, not just one of them. I just can't see the Wii U holding up for long against the Xbox 720 and PS4. I'd say the PS4 will be the monster of the 3 consoles. Nintendo will just bang on releasing the same old games, other publishers will eventually just leave the Wii U like what they did with the Wii. As much as I like Nintendo, I think they've messed up with the Wii U. None of the next gen consoles are out yet and already there's a power war going on.



Neram said:

The rate of evolution of graphics is definitely slowing down. If you look at 6 or 7 years ago, last generation consoles were absolutely paling in comparison to some of the more ambitious PC titles at this point in their life span. Fast forward to the present and you'll see that PC titles still have yet to completely overshadow console games, aside from higher resolution and performance of course. The actual graphics tech is still the same across PC and consoles, even almost 7 years into the 360.

The same can even be said of PSP and DS, or PSVita and 3DS. The distance in horsepower between the PSP and DS was huge, the PSP made DS look like total garbage. Nowadays however, stack 3DS's Resident Evil Revelations, maybe a few other games, against PSVita's Uncharted and honestly while the graphics are still better on the latter, the gap is much, much smaller then it was last generation.

Try and look at it this way: When graphics reach a point where there is no room for improvement, it's nearly the same on every platform, then it will come down to which platform has the next innovation? I think that's what Nintendo's been doing since the DS and even the Wii. They realize this and are getting a head start on innovation. Anyway, my point is I agree and believe the gap between Wii U and other next-gen systems won't be as big as this generation.



Mandoble said:

Neram, what you call "graphics" will never get a point of no room for improvement. Reading your coments you will hardly understand that, you just need to wait 20 years more. Do you know what is the power required for a F1 simulator (Mclaren) without even considering the graphic rendering? But if you want to focus on graphics, you might look for a film named Beowulf (animation), and try to figure out how many PS3 in parallel would be needed to have something like that in a game.



Kisame83 said:

I'm surprised Spencer's getting so much ire from these comments. He wasn't even really mean. Obviously not blown away or overly threatened...but what do you expect? The competition to suddenly bow down and start talking about how blown away they are? He has a point, btw. There is cool stuff being touted for Wii U, but do you expect Microsoft to care when half of the press we see for it is along the lines of "Arkham City, Mass Effect 3, and eventually Aliens Colonial Marines at some point later than Xbox will have it!" If the competition was putting out my system's games a year later, I'd say that's good for their customers. But I wouldn't freak out or start heaping praise.

To me the best and yet most disappointing thing about Wii U is going to come down to processing power. It isn't really about graphics. Compare Oblivion to Skyrim. There's still juice to be squeezed out of this gen. How wet does water need look, ya know? But you need to be able to render these enviroments and process the world. The "next-gen" to me holds the possibility for more experiences like we see in RPGs now taken to the next level of interaction. A Bethesda RPG where your exploits and choice of home shape the politics and economy (beyond the superficial or quest-specific ways they do now). A Bioware RPG that spans generations, crossing a bit of sim territory (like Agarest War, but not lame). I dunno, just a few thoughts. Not gonna lie, it's hard to stay as interested in Wii U when the relevant excitement from me is "Oooooh another New Super Mario Bros!" And I want the 3DS game more. Oh, and not even getting Lords of Shadow 2 for Wii U? Lame.



GamerZack87 said:

Oh, for crying out's comments like that that have forced me to start to rethink my interest in Microsoft! Maybe my next computer will be a Mac...maybe...



Hokori said:

@Zack u should get a Mac or an iPad of sorts, just don't forget Nintendo, Microsoft is making me mad with comments like this



Hetsumani said:

All this "Gamplay is more important than graphics" thing is going to hit Nintendo real bad one day. With the Wii we had two choices, excellent gameplay and lowres graphics (Galaxies, Zelda, Metroid, Brawl), or excellent gameplay and eyecandy graphics (God of War, Fable, Oblivion, Skyrim, Batman Arkham, Assassin's Creed, Uncharted etc. etc.). I think I only wanted 6 Wii games in these 6 years, the regular ips. But in my ps3 i already have 18, not all are ips, and still waiting for more.
Now with the Wii U the technological breach has shortened, and I'm just waiting for the realease date to be announced, but the thing that sold me the console wasn't the gamepad, or nintendoland, not even mario or pikmin, it was the thought of playing Assassin's Creed III on a Nintendo console.



grimbldoo said:

What's funny is that Rich of Review Tech USA (who is so unbiased I was shocked) has told people many times that Nintendo would have to try to be as powerful let alone less powerful than the current gen. The 360 and PS3 are 6 years old, you would have to find an old computer to get hardware that weak.



CaPPa said:

The Wii version of Star Wars The Force Unleashed might have looked like a PS2 game in places (the graphics ranged from quite good to terrible imo) but it played a lot better than the HD versions did. Given the choice of a great playing game with poorer graphics or a great looking game with poorer gameplay I'd take the first option every time. The Force Unleashed 2 was much the same, it looked great on 360/PS3 but was a poor game and looked ok on the Wii but was a much better game to play.

I found the gameplay in most of those 360/PS3 games to be rather average. I'm not a fan of GOW, hated the first Assassin's Creed game and wasn't terribly impressed by Uncharted either. The Wii games (which didn't actually look that bad) were a lot more fun to play and pretty much make up the majority of my top 10 games of this gen (in fact the only 360/PS3 games that would be on it are Batman Arkham City and Mass Effect).

According to the hardware features, the Wii U is a lot more capable than the 360/PS3 and should be able to run the same engines that the next Sony and Microsoft consoles would use. It isn't suprising that Phil Spencer is a about it though as the guy has a history of talking out of his backside (the amount of BS that he spewed out whilst working for Sony was ridiculous).



Kisame83 said:

What's better about the Wii version of TFU? The motion slashing? Honestly I wasn't that impressed. Not saying it is a poor game or disparaging it due to graphics (though I don't know why he holds his saber wrong). But I found it to be a little loose compared to the 360 version. And the camera is horrid. Honestly, I don't have a major problem with the Wii version, but this notion of 360 being all eyecandy and Wii being the true "gameplay" system always seems to boil down to "this version plays via wrist-flicking- INNOVATION."



Emaan said:

Playing catch-up? Let's see : Kinect, Smart Glass. Pathetic microsoft, really. Anyways, I'm sure Wii U will not end up being the most powerful system in this upcoming generation, but that means nothing to me. As long as it brings back the third party support that the Wii lost along the way. Wii U will be great, Microsoft should honestly get over themselves.



GoldenBanana said:

My motto has always been:

"if you want realistic graphics, go outside and watch nature, and (...)" (no processor will ever beat the complexity and perfect beauty of reality itself)

"(...) If you wanna have fun, play a Nintendo game =p "

I play for the sake of fun and imagination. It is true that I may like HD textures and excellent physics engines (who doesn´t ?), but , when it comes to think about what has always brought me to play videogames at its core, it has always been for fun and imagination. I don´t need to watch realistic water, show me artistic and fantastic water like in WindWaker or in Okami instead, because, that indeed isn´t something that reality can offer me to watch.

I may like slaying "realistic" monsters in Bethesda´s RPGs, but my personal taste, favours gaming that creates fantasy rather than gaming that tries to imitate some kind of approximation of what reality is or can be (we know dragons do not exist, but why do they have to look like a souless giant flying crocodile ? I prefer that the same amount of processing power goes invested in drawing a memorable dragon full of life, colour and personality (art design!), plus something fun, ingenious and well done about the gameplay involved in killing it.

This kind of thinking put into a game, is one of Ninty´s brightest.

(try to deny this fact: the game design, the art beauty and the gameplay put into Galaxy´s stages and Skyward Sword´s dungeons, deliver pure entertainment at its finest core definition. My jaw literally dropped playing them.)

The way I see it, HD will give Ninty more freedom to bring us all of those things we love, plus, graphics capabilities to withstand modern gamer´s taste standards (delivering all of those "mature" titles that "everybody" seem to need so much). To achieve that, I think they won´t need much more "horsepower" than that of the PS3, 360 or anything else that may come next (and they know it).



Vincent294 said:

@Lew3107 Now while graphics shouldn't decide a console, you may want to know that you may have been missing out on quite a few good 360 games. I've been using both, w/ a slight emphasis on my new 360. Both are great though, but some of the Wii games are inferior beyond graphics. Namely, the CPU can limit how much you can do w/ a game. I'm surprised Xenoblade works on my Wii, and shows it can do quite a bit, but I bet most games wouldn't function very good. MW3 had quite a few corners cut on Wii, beyond graphics.



Vincent294 said:

@GamerZack They weren't very bad w/ that comment. Yeah, it may have been a little biased, because Wii U did much more than catch up (it did that and then some, plus add in quite a few innovations). However, they did show very little Zelda, etc. besides Pikmin & a re-do of NSMB Wii. But Microsoft is okay, and while Vista did make me consider switching to Mac, Windows 7 was okay. If 8 can improve, since 7 felt like catching up, they'll be well-off.



Assassinated said:

I don't think anyone has thought of this yet, but there is a potential that the next Microsoft and Sony systems could actually be at a disadvantage by having a more powerful system. If the Wii U is close to the next systems, comparable to how the 360 was close to the PS3, They could steal the advantage Microsoft had over Sony this generation. If the Wii U is the easiest system to develop for, there is a good chance that 3rd parties with multiplatform games would design them foe Wii U then port them to the other consoles. If you compare most any multiplatform 360 game with its PS3 counterpart, you'll find that the 360 version looks (and sometimes plays) a tiny bit better. This is because the games are developed for the 360 and ported to the PS3, not taking advantage of the Cell Processor, as it is more difficult to utilize properly. While the Wii wasn't powerful enough to keep up with the other systems, the second most powerful system became the go to system to develop for for third parties. Also like the 360, the Wii U will have the tremendous advantage of coming out first, letting third parties get comfortable with developing for the system, before they even get their hands on the competition. Assuming it doesn't fall too far behind the others that release, I wouldn't be surprised if the Wii U became the go to system to develop for for multiplatform games next generation.



Kage_88 said:

Gosh...what can I say that hasn't been said a million times before?

Yeah, the PS4/Xbox Next will be more powerful than the Wii U...but I think it'll be nowhere near the gap that Wii faced with the PS3/Xbox 360. In terms of visuals, I think what hurt Wii more was the fact that it wasn't HD (rather than the weaker hardware). As evidenced by games like Mario Galaxy and Skyward Sword, Nintendo really know how to make 'weak' hardware really sing.

Now that Wii U supports HD (and assuming that the other consoles will, as well); will the difference in power REALLY make that much of a difference this time around? Also, we must remember that the Wii U is capable of streaming 3 seperate images at once - that alone would really tax the console (and considering that fact, I'm impressed with the visuals it can still display).

Of course, power doesn't just mean 'grafix' - but also physics, AI, larger game worlds, etc. This is where the next-gen consoles will really be a threat, IMO. However, with astronomical development costs and a smaller margin for profit, how much money would Sony and Microsoft be willing to spend for their machines' power? Profit trumps all (despite what graphics snobs think), and I think these two companies are seriously considering how they can make their products evolve beyond a simple power upgrade. Move and Kinect display a willingness to follow in Nintendo's footsteps in regards to new input-methods and game delivery (as is also evident in SmartGlass and Sony's purchase of Gakai).

In other words, I belive innovation - not 'power' - will be the primary focus of next gen.



BulbasaurusRex said:

My family doesn't own an HD TV, and we don't care to buy one anytime soon. We just don't see the difference in picture quality as being worth the extra money. Besides, a good 'ol CRT provides absolutely no motion control lag.



OlderGamer said:

I will stick out my neck and predict that the next X-box and PS won't come out until 2014.



hYdeks said:

@BulbasaurusRex the difference between a CRT and HD is like comparing the NES to the Wii. HDTV's in 1080p just looks simply amazing

@OlderGamer I think the next Xbox will come out next year in about the same fashion Wii U is this year. I think in reality, Xbox is now feeling the push, now more than ever, to make an "upgrade" system. I say upgrade cause it won't be the technical leap we seen when the xbox 360 came out, it'll be a subtle update to 360 that is probably ALIL better than Wii U, but barely.



Moshugan said:

It's true that the Wii U propably won't be able to do all the graphical tricks that Unreal Engine 4 and some other future engines demand, but it still has the processing power to handle everything that is needed to make an excellent game. It has the needed oomph to maintain good A.I. and realistic physics.
It will be amazing to see what Nintendo will accomplish with their late generation first party Wii U titles. I'm still impressed by the likes of Super Mario Galaxy 2.



rjejr said:

@Assassinated - Well said.

@BulbusaurRex - hats off for admitting what might have gotten you flamed. It's also the reason Nintendo didn't need HD 6 years ago, but now they do. Hard to buy a non-HD tv these days. I don't have any interest in a 3-D tv but next one will probably be one just b/c the best tv's will have it as a feature. I just won't buy any glasses.

Closing thought - if the under powered and under gamed Wii can last a generation - 6 years - the Wii U, which also plays Wii games, surely will as well. I don't have any numbers to back this up, but I'm pretty sure the Xbox360 sold better than the Xbox (outside of Japan anyway). I don't know if the WIi U will ever sell better than the Wii, but it will be a better system much more comparable to it's future competitors.



Mandoble said:

@Assassinated , so what is cheaper for a developper? Create its uber game for PC (as all of them aready do), and then move it almost directly to a windows 8 XBoX or create it initially for WiiU and then try to port it to PC/NextBox? Because at the moment all are ports from PC to XBoX/PS3 (except platform exclusives).



MeloMan said:

A typically Nintendo competitor reply, lol. In any case, the first part of the article is pretty much what I've said about the latest generations of consoles... but time will tell, eh Nintendo?



ianmage1 said:

"I would have loved to see Zelda or Metroid or some of my favorite Nintendo franchises, which I didn't see."
Man, you should consider how terrible your E3s are in comparison to Nintendo's...



scrubbyscum999 said:

I have gotten to the point where the talk really almost doesn't matter. When the Wii U comes out we will see if it delivers. I do feel though that Spencer being a little cocky. I mean he hasn't seen the system either. Why can'y he just let Nintendo do their thing and he do his. Actions speak louder than words, he will have to prove himself.



lanabanana said:

I bet that Spencer guy still snuggles with his teddy XD. What can you expect from an Xbox person ... For the most part, the people who play Xbox are all a bunch of immature people. No offence to those Xbox gamers up there ^^ >X'D



Kisame83 said:

@BulbasaurusRex I can't speak for motion control lag. My Wii is mine and hooked up to my older TV in my room. My Xbox is more the family device (I'm the only gamer in the house, so everyone else uses it for DVDs, running video off USB or streaming, music, and maybe Rock Band 3) in the living room, but I never bought into that Kinect nonsense. But on the issue of cost- it is actually a great time to take the plunge. Last year at black friday we upgraded our living room set to decent-sized HD set for under $200. I used to say the same thing as you, that the difference did not justify the cost. But the $400-500 investment for even a low-end TV are gone, and you can get a nice one on the cheap around holiday sales times.



BestBuck15 said:

So microsoft reckon the Wii u will have the same graphics as the 360. Don't think so! The Wii u processor will be far more advanced than the 360's and the graphics will be better on Wii u. The thing that always strikes me about 360 owners is they claim the reason they love it is because of xbox live. Well I had a 360 and I taught xbox live was crap, so I sold it and got a PS3 which is a far better machine. I have a Wii as well. Oh yeah they are always on about the great 3rd party exclusives as well. In my eye these games are not great at all. At least Wii u will have something the 360 could only dream about, 1st party Nintendo Games. 360 hardcore gamers? don't make me laugh.



fortius54 said:

I think it is interesting that MicroSoft continues with the banter. They got it handed to them in this generation of consoles by a weaker system in terms of hardware power. The we're constantly taking digs at Nintendo for being gimmicky. Then, they turnaround and bring out Kinect.

Maybe, instead of worrying about the other guys, they should look at hiring capable software developers. They have one IP that they can truly call theirs that anyone cares about. They are way behind in that category. Graphical Power is not everything, and that don't even lead in that.



Kisame83 said:

@fortius54 "360 hardcore gamers? don't make me laugh."

This attitude is insulting. It is as bad as the comment from Spencer that has you riled up. No, I'd say worse.

I've been a hardcore gamer since the NES, and Nintendo has always been the first system I've bought in a given console generation. But this notion that the other consoles don't = gaming is ridiculous.

Really, it's funny. During the SNES era, Nintendo stood head and shoulders over the competition in terms of raw power. And we Nintendo fans reveled in it. And now we say things like "we don't need graphics, we have gameplay!" This insinuates that no other company besides Nintendo is making "games" and also ignores the time when Nintendo simply had the best console in ALL respects.

Really, if I break out Super Turrican 1 and 2, Cybernator, Contra III, etc then any gamer nearby will comment on how awesome these were, some of the best ever made. But if I switch my shooting into first person and play anything that isn't Wii's Metroid Prime offerings, apparently the modern Nintendo fan believes I am not truly "gaming." This kind of detestable elitism is the same thing we would often claim others of doing. Food for thought.



BestBuck15 said:

It was me that made the comment, I'm not just a Nintendo fan. I agree with you that during the snes, mega drive era that Nintendo stood head and shoulders above Sega, and that the snes was more powerful than Mega drive. But that was not the reason, It was Nintendo's game design that was far superior to Sega's. I'm also a bit pissed that Wii u isn't going to be more powerful than PS3, But I do think its chipset will be more advanced and will be able to do more things because it is coming out much later than PS3. So I was just having a go at Microsoft for saying it'll be basically be on the same level as 360. It'll be far more advanced than 360, It might have the same power but it'll be way more advanced. How old is 360? is it 6 or 7? Wii u will be a little bit more modern than that.



Kisame83 said:

Ha sorry, I messed up my reply quote. But yeah, I certainly hope the processor is better. I don't need water to look any wetter. But the appeal of the next gen to me will be how much more the games can crank out. My concern with Wii U is that while it stands to reason that the tech should be, we have all these comments about needing to balance costs of the console with those of the tablet. So it is possible they are running with 6 year old Xbox/PS3-ish tech to keep costs manageable. It is the same reason the controller is single-touch. In a world where tablets are everywhere, e-readers have become tablets themselves, and most phones are mini-tablets, that will be noticeable.



Henmii said:

"Iwata Expects Wii U to Last a Generation"

And he is right! Nintendo doesn't participate in the great graphics rush anymore. They are taking their own route! That's just the way it goes, whether we like it or not!



Drawdler said:

"effectively a 360 when you think of graphical capability"

Obviously this kid hasn't seen Zelda HD, the graphical demos, or screw it, anything from Nintendo from the past two years.



Trikeboy said:

Why are microsoft so douchy? Watch this years E3 conferences again. On the Nintendo videos you see people smiling, talking, playing together. On Microsoft and Sony, straight faced, no emotion, and playing a game solo. What sounds more appealing?



KiroX777 said:

the only real posts came from #14 - #21 i stopped reading after #22 because it seems everyone else is str8 ^ nintendofanbois. "we dont need power nintendo! give us another 6th gen console and we're happy! who needs graphics anyways!" lol i once used those words too once opon a time, to make myself feel better the fact that i only owned a wii lol grow up.

I will be buying my Wiiu after they release the black one. Knowing nintendo its best to wait as long as possible before buying their product. My 3ds mocks me everyday when i knew for a fact they would release a new version of the 3ds. but nintendo lied when they said they weren't going to release a new 3ds and how it had everything already. something like that. idk why i trusted them -__- but i couldnt care less anymore with nintendo's false hype, i hope others will have the same patients as i do. its for your own good!

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...