News Article

EA: Excited About New Generation Which Is "Yet to Come"

Posted by Thomas Whitehead

Not positive words for Nintendo

Whenever the issue of "generations" of consoles comes up when discussing Wii U, it often leads to hurt feelings and blood on the floor. Defining a console generation is arguably a complex business, while some clearly feel that graphical fidelity and "power" truly represent a step to "next gen". That's left Wii U in a no-man's land in the debate, with some saying that as successor to Wii and with its own innovations it's next generation, and others arguing that elements of its capabilities fail to move it into a new era beyond Xbox 360 and PS3; it's all down to personal perspective.

In any case, some perspectives that matter to Nintendo are those held by the biggest game developers and publishers in the world, the support of whom will be important for Wii U. Unfortunately for Nintendo, EA's CEO John Riccitello said the following about the system in a recent investor briefing.

Never count Nintendo out. They've got some of the best IP in the game industry. When their marquee titles show up, that's when you usually see the bounce. I deeply respect the achievements they've had over the last several years. And as I said, you never really count them out.

Having said that, I wouldn't say that we see a correlation between the results that Nintendo has shown with their console début of the Wii U and what we see coming. We see a pretty sharp distinction, and unfortunately I'm unable to go any further than that.

Ours is an industry where a lot of devices come in and represent themselves as the next generation, or the next generation after that. In many ways we would argue that the what we're describing as "gen 4" is yet to come. It's that that we're excited about, and that's what we're investing in. And frankly, we've been quite consistent with that for some time, while recognizing the frustration our inability to articulate precisely why causes for you.

That lack of enthusiasm for Wii U is countered by EA's commitment to the upcoming new systems from Sony and Microsoft.

As you might well expect, we know more about the roadmap, and more about what's coming in consumer electronics, in terms of the specifics of devices that will play games, than you might otherwise be exposed to. [With] the information that we have, we remain bullish. It's why we have outlined our plan to invest… in the current fiscal year $80 million in that opportunity.

As this is from the head of EA when briefing investors on the upcoming priorities for the company, this is a rather damaging suggestion that the publisher isn't overly enthused by Nintendo's system; we've been here before with Wii, of course, but that doesn't mean that comments such as these aren't disappointing. That "unprecedented partnership" between EA and Nintendo that Riccitello proposed at E3 2011 is looking ever more distant.

What do you make of Riccitello's comments, and his assertion that "gen 4" is yet to come?


From the web

User Comments (152)



Reala said:

I think his comments are fair enough, though I don't get why he says gen 4, why gen 4?



AceTrainerAndy said:

Never again will I buy an EA product. If they don't include Nintendo in their latest titles I will be mad.



ThomasBW84 said:

@Reala I'm guessing he's referring to the point where Sony entered the market - PS1/N64 - PS2/GameCube/Xbox - PS3/Wii/Xbox 360

A guess, but that seems to be what he means.



Peach64 said:

I don't think EA have a lack of enthusiasm for Wii U, and they're not dismissing it. They're just looking at it from a business perspective. The Microsoft and Sony consoles will be similar enough for them to easily put a game out on both. Wii U won't be able to handle the same game, so they'll just have to work on Wii U specific stuff. People are going out of their way to take offence at this. It will be no different to last gen. Wii didn't get stuff like Orange Box, Mass Effect, Dead Space and Crysis, but EA certainly supported it.



timp29 said:

Won't Gen 4 require some new use of technology, perhaps 3D TV or higher resolutions or electrodes implanted somewhere fun in our bodies



Molotov said:

Well... Smt Smtn Shouldve Made The Wii U More Powerful And/Or Competitive In Pricing And Ea President Wouldve Showed Up At Nintendos E3 2012 Presentation



Einherjar said:

To be honest, im pretty happy that my "own little gaming universe" circles around nintendo consoles and handhelds. I dont give a wet monkey about "gens" and "technical power" These arent the things that make games fun for me.
I can absolutely live with the fact, that the WiiU may or may not be on the same technical level as its "old" competitors.
Its the games that spice things up. And i donst see a reason to buy a new, high powered console if the game line up will consist of the same brown / grey shooter stuff we played for "2 gens" now.
EA is one of the companies wichs games do not appeal to me in the slightest. So, if they dont support nintendo because they are more interestet in raw console hardware power, so be it. For me, its not a big loss



Chunky_Droid said:

Assuming Sony even have the funds to develop and launch a new console :/

I know they've got an announcement coming, but we'll have to wait and see what that is.



WolfyWardark said:

Why don't EA just host a TV sports channel, then they'd have all the graphical realism they could ever want.



GloryQuestor said:

From a business standpoint, it's easy to understand, but lately a lot of companies have been looking at it the wrong way. The mindset of most third-party developers should be, "Can we make X fit onto Y with a minimum of dollars and development time?" Lately, however, the mindset of so many companies has been, "Well, we can't make the Wii U Gamepad work with our game, so we're not going to lift a finger to do anything with it."

Third-parties need to get a clue: stop with the cop-out reasons and start answering the primary question. Or even better, tell us WHY you can't make it work on Wii U, peripherals aside. These days, it's like they have to keep the "why" away from the gaming public, leaving all of us more confused and less interested in their products. >_>



star-fox said:

@Reala His comments are not fair, they are at best cynical. This is to get back at Nintendo for refusing to make EA the sole online provider for the Wii U.

@Peach64 I kindly disagree. Capcoms's MT framework was able to deploy games from the PS3 down to the IOS with different configuration. To say that system capability is the problem to ignore the real issue. I agree that the PS4 and Nextbox will probable share almost same assets but Nintendo has ensured that Wii U is capable of handling scalable games.

EA, in addition to other 3rd party publishers, are trying to use their influence to ensure that Nintendo gets out of the hardware market. Nintendo is also aware of these and has decided to go the conservative cum casual route because no matter how powerful a Nintendo console is, it will be shafted for one reason or another.

I the Wii U will allow for the emergence of medium sized publishers, if not we might be staring at the prospects of having the likes of EA, Activision, Take Two, Square-Enix (in the almost-devoid-of creativity-form) etc being the only viable publishers in the industry. I shudder to think of the lack of creativity in such a time.



New_3DaSh_XL said:

I honestly don't care about EA. I didn't even before this "announcement" of theirs, although they've pretty much just guaranteed that not not only do I not care about them, I dislike them.



ivanmata said:

It is a little disappointing, because let's face it, microsoft and sony's new consoles will be way more powerful than the wii u, which means we will not get many third party games, but on the other side, we have plenty first party games (the really fun ones with excellent gameplay), that will definitely keep the console alive



rjejr said:

@ThomasBW84 - PS1/N64 - PS2/GameCube/Xbox - PS3/Wii/Xbox 360
1 - Sega Saturn/PS1
1 1/2 - N64
2 Dreamcast/PS2/Gamecube/Xbox
3 Wii/Xbox360/PS3
3 1/2 Wii U
4 PS4/Xbox720

Leaving Sega out entirely just seemed so mean spirited

Did anybody read the part where he said this during an "investor briefing"? He's trying to get investors in his company excited for things that are upcoming.

The decision can't be made on whether or not Wii U is 4th gen until Sony and MS new systems come out and game developers start making games on them and we find out if the Wii U can run those games. The Wii could not run HD games so everything multiplat looked awful. If the Wii U can run multiplat games in HD that look "similiar" then it belongs. But we don't know yet.

Has anybody ever stopped to think that we don't know a whole lot about new Wii U games because Nintendo isn't allowed to talk about new games on the other systems yet until the new systems are announced?



Nintenjoe64 said:

@Reala Maybe he's trying to troll MS and Nintendo fanboys in one swoop by making out that the playstation invented games. To be honest, he isn't taking swipes at Nintendo so much as trying to generate hype for the most expensive games EA have ever made (the next gen's). EA are one of the few 3rd party publishers that do well from Nintendo each generation so I doubt they would give Nintendo the cold shoulder during a time that the industry is in need of stimulation.

I want Sony and MS to carry on making good consoles/games because they are the ones that push Nintendo to innovate and a Nintendo only world would have seriously lacked decent driving games (besides MK) in the last few years but I would love it if their next consoles completely alienated their own fanbase. Everyone thinks it will be Sony but I can imagine a windows 8 console sucking even more than PS4 with a Dualshock4 (i.e. has a touchscreen).



Peach64 said:


They more than likely will still scale stuff down for Wii U. The sports games and racing games are certainly going to keep coming out of every platform regardless of specs, from PC to smartphones.

EA haven't made any kind of decision here so I don't get how any could get mad at them (btw @3Dash, saying you hate something sort of contradicts not caring). They're just saying the Wii U is on a different level of processing power to the MS and Sony ones, which is something Nintendo decided. Opinions and decisions don't come into it.



Efthymis said:

First, I never did like EA or any game of their own (No, Mass Effect is not theirs; they can't be credited for just publishing a game). Second, we all know EA wanted Nintendo to include Origin as the sole software distribution method on the Wii U. Back then, Nintendo considered allowing such platforms (even Valve's Steam). Then Nintendo said "No". That must have been bitter. Cause EA wouldn't be able to get a few pennies from every downloaded game. What I'm getting at is that EA (as any company out there) are just after the money. I don' recall any quality title from them in a loooong time. Hey, EA, It's been a loooong time. How have you been? Look, both Nintendo and you said things that you are going to regret. But I think you can put you stupid IPs up yours. For gamers. You monster!



HouseofBees said:

Nintendo always strangely seem to be cut out of the whole 'generation' thing, as if they're following behind. Granted, graphics have always been the gimmick of the other consoles - but in terms of tech innovations (e.g. rumble, motion), Nintendo has led the way.

But if they don't get completely on board, then I'll bet neither will a lot of other developers. This needs to be sorted - it'll leave a bit of a sour taste if, for instance, we get another unchanged port of the previous FIFA.



Peach64 said:


Developers are already making games on them and have been for a while. That's exactly what he's talking about here.

"Having said that, I wouldn't say that we see a correlation between the results that Nintendo has shown with their console début of the Wii U and what we see coming. We see a pretty sharp distinction, and unfortunately I'm unable to go any further than that."

The specs are pretty much public as so many people have dev units for them.



element187 said:

So EA said they aren't going to put their next gen shovelware on the Wii U.. Why do we care?



chiptoon said:

I think its possible that he is talking about something more than just horsepower. If he's really that much more interested in the other new systems then it means that there is something more favorable to EA about those systems that Nintendo didn't want to include. Possibly new evolutions in DRM or ways to wring pennies out of customers.



gavn64 said:

hey knux the current model of hardware manufacturer selling licenses to publisher's is in the 7th gen it started gen 1(nes) all the way to gen 7 which started with the wiiu nintendo built the industry as we know it today im fed up with people pissing on em no respect.



sector19 said:

I really don't care much about EA, but it's harsh for Nintendo cause it's money and they likely would want some of that investment but again Nintendo has all first party games that alone make worthy buy it's console so I fell sorry for EA.



triforcepower73 said:

I don't really care about what gen is what. In the end, we'll be able to see who has the better games and who sells more consoles(Nintendo). Then EA and all the other unsupportive companies will start crying about how they missed a great opportunity the same way they did with the wii.



grovertheblue said:

@Einherjar Well put, I feel quite similar to what you said. Also, I find less and less time to play games and the content that Nintendo releases on their consoles is more than enough to satisfy my gaming appetite and available time. And honestly, the nostalgia I have with Nintendo counters any technical prowess that Sony or MS have to offer.



Sir_Deadly said:

I still do not see how the PS4 and Xbox 720 will be much more powerful than wii u! they barley put out 720p where as Wii U can put out 1080p easily. If these consoles are going to be much more powerful, get ready to fork over $400+ because a 32 gig Wii U was $350. And people thought that was too expensive for 2009/2010 hardware. Nope, i believe they'll be able to put the same games as on Wii U that will be on PS4 and Xbox 720.



grovertheblue said:

@rjejr "Has anybody ever stopped to think that we don't know a whole lot about new Wii U games because Nintendo isn't allowed to talk about new games on the other systems yet until the new systems are announced?" That's a novel thought and one that is totally viable. Hopefully, publishers recognize the potential of releasing games on all three platforms and give WiiU the games is derserves. I don't see the 720 or PS4 being that much more powerful than the WiiU anyway, if they are so much more powerful and the WiiU is already "overprice" how much will these new consoles cost? Upwards of $500-$600 dollars. I see a great deal of the people complaining about the price of the WiiU quietly shutting their mouths once they see what the PS4 and 720 have to offer both price and spec wise.



Kitsunekin said:

This guy's speaking nonsense. There's no such thing, at least for Nintendo, as the Wii U being a "4th Gen" console. If you start counting that games were introduced since the PSX, then his only motivations are:

  • To deteriorate Nintendo's image to a 'wider' public.
  • Or to be a completely fool that thinks SONY/Microsoft could make profit in this generation.

SONY's situation is harsher than other companies, in the sense that PS3 didn't win the 7th Generation's console war, and PSVITA is not selling well (it's a catastrophe, heck, PSP outsells its newer counterpart!).

Graphics don't make up a console, and they don't make gaming fun. Games can stand a close chance, but what really makes it your console, what engages you into hours and hours of tiring gameplay is the funny moments you have with it.

Why do I prefer playing SNES over Wii? Because SNES brings me more memories of me having fun, just that, simple times when life wasn't hard, when you didn't have to make your living, when you were a kid. Wii is a good console, don't misundestand me, but it's not for me what I expected.



AbeVigoda said:

The 360 and PS3 will still likely get scaled back versions of several next-gen titles for the next year or two due to their massive install base, so Nintendo could see some of those games as well. However, after 2015 I imagine they will focus soley on the PS4 and 720.



Shworange said:

Most of us here buy Nintendo consoles for Nintendo products. I love Nintendo games. Those are always the ones I anticipate the most. I don't really care about what many other big publishers put out. That's just how it is. I've come to love the indie game scene Nintendo is cultivating as well. So EA, say what you will, I'm not thrilled with your product.



Magnet_Man018 said:

All this "generations" thing is getting really boring. Always comparing consoles and discussing nonsense about where does a console go in all that generations crap. Just enjoy the consoles and the games, people, and stop talking bull!



Robo-goose said:

Updated graphics are fantastic, but new gameplay experiences are lying around everywhere waiting to be dug up by someone. If Sony and Microsoft can't bring anything else to the table other than better graphics, they might find this generation (or the next, depending on your perspective) to be quite similar to the last (or current, perspective). I really hope that Microsoft will not share EA's mindset. I want to see a vastly improved Kinect in the next/current generation. It has so much potential, but it put so little on the plate.



AyeHaley said:

@star-fox I agree. Why else would he publicly announce a solid partnership with Nintendo while rumors of our favorite company using Origin were floating around. And now suddenly Nintendo isn't interesting anymore? Ok..



Kirk said:

When he's talking about Gen 4 being different from what we've seen so far with Wii U I don't think he's means it's just a big leap in power or anything that simple.

I think he's on about the core user experience being different. You know, with the likes of streaming and cloud based services. Having things like Sky/Cable channels and TiVo style recording functionality. Lots of social media integration. The full integration of proper App store style services. Having the basic Playstation and Xbox console experiences built into the likes of Sony branded TVs, tablets, consoles, cable boxes etc, and same with Microsoft's new tablets etc, and being able to use a single account across these different devices.

All that kind of thing.

We're already seeing the first steps towards this kind of stuff and it's all stuff that Nintendo hasn't really embraced with the Wii U for the most part.

If the new consoles from Sony and Microsoft do embrace all that stuff, and really do to town with it, then the difference between Wii U and the others really will be quite significant in terms of the end user experience imo.

I think that's what he's talking about.



Dogpigfish said:

I'm not a customer of EA, so I can't really respond or care about their goals. As far as the generation, it's clear that Wii U brings something new and innovative to the world, which consumers are happy about. Seeing as Nintendo generally sells 10 fold in NA compared to Europe, we'll see a shift with higher taxes in the states and media upheaval of game violence. In my opinion, this will impact the other big 2 more than Nindy, which continues to sell games with a longer replay value.



Boo_Buster said:

EA sucks old wrinkly balls. I have been kiboshing them for years and have missed nothing worth crying over. I shed a tear over spilled milk, but never because I missed Madden or Mass Effect. They are the embodiment of what is wrong with video games. I advise you to do the only thing you can to effect this parasite and not give them your hard earned money.



fortius54 said:

I'll just start out by saying I was a huge sports franchise fan especially in the area of football (American football that is). In recent years however, that has changed. I know I am in the minority on this most likely, but EA Sports certainly doesn't do anything for me anymore. In fact, I was not real pleased with NCAA 2013. It is just not worth the $60 to get it every year. I played one season through and I was done.

I know that EA has been putting out some pretty decent series from some of their subsidiaries like Bioware. SO, it is a little disappointing to hear that they have backtracked with Nintendo. There is most likely some things we will not see, but I think I can live with it.

The fact of the matter is that any third party will be playing second fiddle on a Nintendo system. Nintendo's first party stuff is just so much better. A lot of that stems from they know what there systems can do, and some not all of the third party developers don't care to learn. EA likes to be the big dog, and they will never be that on a system Nintendo puts out.



9th_Sage said:

I personally believe the rumor of EA being pissed at Nintendo because they offered Nintendo Origin as the 'backend' of their online infrastructure and Nintendo said (paraphrasing here) "What are you, high?".



LordJumpMad said:

I agree with that, gen 4 didn't really start untill PlayStation was release.
Thanks to Sony who saved the videogame crash of 1994.



Blue_Yoshi said:

It always seems like no matter what, Nintendo is always a step back ever since they moved on from the NES. Super Nintendo was inferior to Sega Genesis, Nintendo 64 had lesser power compared to PSX, at least the Gamecube was technically the best out of all 3 systems but with the Wii they failed to follow up with HD. Now the Wii U is better than 360/PS3 but its simply gonna be blown away when PS4/720 come out. However one thing thats been keeping Nintendo alive all these years is that there titles have a magical feel to them compared to that of Disney with their movies. Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon will make sure that Nintendo will never die.



FullbringIchigo said:

as far as i'm concerned a generation starts when a consoles successor comes out and as the Wii U is the Wii successor that means it's next gen it has nothing to do with power

also "gen4"???? this is the 8th generation not the 4th



Kirk said:


Now don't play ignorant.

Both SNES and N64 were more powerful than the competition at the time and anyone who knows even the slightest bit of accurate information about these systems should be well aware of this.

This "step back" didn't start happening until GC, which was less powerful than the Xbox, and once again if you have the slightest bit of information available to you this should be pretty evident too.

You really are very misinformed.

The Wii definitely and very clearly fell short in terms of power however, as well as in many other aspects too, and it looks like the Wii U is heading down that same path to a degree too.

You are also right about the great collection of popular game series and characters being one of their strong points that will always serve them well however.



fortius54 said:

@Blue_Yoshi I can agree with this, and it is one of the reasons, I do not think that there is direct competition between Nintendo and PS360. A Nintendo will sell just because of the first party titles. I am more likely to by a Nintendo System for the sole purpose of playing Zelda, Mario, Pikmin, etc, than I am to buy a XBox for the sole purpose of playing Halo or Gears of War.

I think a lot of that has to do with the experience that you get from a Nintendo game. There is innovation. I don't find that with the other guys.



ArcanaXVI said:

So THAT'S where the "unprecedented partnership" went--EA saw whatever aces Sony and Microsoft have in the hole and backed away slowly. Personally, I don't care much for EA anyhow, and with all of the great games lined up for the Wii U, it's no great loss.



JeanLuc_Vaycard said:

Glad Sony will be the saving grace of great companies like EA that bring us quality gaming. Gen 4! I believe!



Blue_Yoshi said:

@Kirk well if you look at infographs it will clearly show you that the PSX had way more processing power than the N64. As for GC, it was the most powerful system at the time or at least had the best framerate. Technically speaking the PS2 was the worse system and the GC was said to be a little more powerful than the Xbox. Just look at launch title like Super Smash Bros. Melee that clearly show detail in Mario's overalls, or the Dinosaurlike figure and movement in Yoshi(which they removed from Brawl much to my Dinosaur fanboy dismay.)



McGruber said:

Look, to put it simply, when Nintendo chooses to put out underpowered systems it also chooses the burdon of being the only one putting out quality AAA, system selling exclusives. We have seen this for years. Their recent changes to development structure are important & encouaging, but a little late imo.



Kirk said:


You're clearly looking at the wrong inforgraphs.

N64 pooped all over PS in pretty much every area in terms of tech specs.

The N64 was capable of these kinds of graphics for example (also, surprisingly great music and voice acting in this game too):

The advantage the PS had was the memory capacity of the CDs Vs Cartridges, which meant better CD quality music obviously and the capacity to store way more textures for example. Overall though the N64 was more powerful technically.

There was some debate about the whole GC Vs Xbox because each system had it's strengths but ultimately I think most people agree the Xbox was overall maybe just a little more powerful, and most of the raw specs back that assertion up.



edhe said:

Is that why EA are releasing no games for the Wii U?

And you can bet EA are excited about this new "generation" if it means no more trade ins and excessive DLC.



Blue_Yoshi said:

Considering that EA stands for "Electronic Arts" its surprising that they arent taking advantage of the Wii U's unique Gamepad.



Kirk said:


They were putting out system selling quality AAA titles long before they decide to make their systems under powered compared to the competition. In fact, in it's day the SNES was host to more AAA first party titles, that still stand as absolute classics even to this day, than pretty much any other system before or since, and the SNES was a beast of a system in pretty much every area at the time.

Edit: Oh wait... I think I read your post wrong. My bad.



McGruber said:

The only reason we see so few games from 3rd parties on Nintendo systems is they don't sell. The reason they don't sell is because Nintendo does not do a good job of selling systems to those groups of gamers. Also why buy a cross platform game on a WiiU when you know most of the world is playing said game on a 360/PS3? I mean if I had a 360 there is no way I'd have bought Black Ops for Wii... c'mon 'Tendo!



SCAR said:

We'll see what happens. I think EA will be missing out on an opportunity if they decide to ditch Wii U. It would be kind of blasphemous too, and not only torwards Nintendo, but the industry as a whole. I don't think they'll just ditch it, but that's just me.



Jukilum said:

@Kirk I doubt that's what he was talking about. I don't think that kind of thing makes much of a difference from a game publisher's perspective.



jr3482 said:

I think of it like this... Do we really buy Nintendo consoles for third party games? Its awesome to have those third party games but I mean honestly when I pick up a Nintendo controller I want to play Nintendo brand games. And why? Well because they are not only more fun, but of a higher quality of game. Games that bring people closer together with their unique form of game play. Games that take us back to our youth with nostalgia or stimulate our minds with complex puzzles. If EA wants to puts backing into "power" and "graphics" that's fine by me. I would rather see Mario and Zelda, as opposed to whatever new EA sports game or bland knock off third person shooter they release next. We support Nintendi for Nintendo, not for EA or anyone else.



Solatorobo said:

Consodering that EA has been around before the ps1, it really puzzles me why the hell they call it "gen 4". Also EA should know that graphics isn't how nintendo rolls, with the gamepad, they have made their own advancement and niche and are letting sony/microsoft fight their own fight, which isn't that bad an idea. Take note that unlike sony and microsoft, nintendo only make game related stuff, while the others have other things they can fall back on, I don't think nintendo can afford to make a console as powerful as the others.



Reala said:

Seeing so many claim that they don't buy nintendo to play 3rd party games can't be very encouraging to anybody from a 3rd party reading this, I thought the wii had some awesome 3rd party games even if they didn't get the sales I felt they deserved.



Yosher said:

Meh. I'll stay with Nintendo no matter what. PS4/Xbox 720 can kiss my behind for all I care, the previous Playstations and Xboxes didn't really interest me either aside from very few titles (Final Fantasy, Resident Evil, Dead or Alive).



defrb said:

EA is taking the safe course, when they choose wiiu as platform they need to make exclusives, because ps4/xbox720 will be more powerfull.
Theres not 1 EA game im after, i think the company lack a lot of innovativity and creativity. Cant be said about nintendo! They are my freinds



SparkOfSpirit said:

Another company that wants to forget the best era for games was before the N64/PS1 gen.

Who cares anyway, they'll be porting their sports games regardless.



gavn64 said:

its not the 4th gen stop saying that and by the way super nintendo destroyed the megadrive technically and creatively evidence you ask lets do some comparisons alttp vs. phantasy star smw vs. any of the sonic games super metroid vs. strider easy nintendo wins on all counts and the psx more powerful than the N64 dont even make me laugh mario 64 vs. crash bandi..... cant even finish it's so funny this analogy aplies to sony as far as quality software versus nintendo goes "dont bring a knife to a gun fight"



Davidiam007 said:

I've noticed that both this site and wii u daily seem to post a lot of the negative crap people say. A lot of developers who have actually taken the time to understand its architecture give nothing but praises. And from the console leaks I've come across is that Xbox is sort of following the foot steps of nintendo with the whole more efficient processor and gpgpu which means its not that much more powerful then everyone thinks it will be however ps4 spec rumors are rediculous and if they true and ea complains about wii u's price. Ps4 is rumor to cost $600-$800 and games will be expensive to develop.



Flashman said:

I have no faith in the next Gen of console. I can see them coming out at a heavily inflated price of about $700 and setting off with a sluggish start. I can also see the Ouya as been the catalyst for a massive selection of affordable android consoles that will heavily reduce the already dwindling number of gamers in the world. Plus with cloud gaming coming (at a slow pace) like onlive etc I am not convinced there will be a need for very very expensive propriety hardware. The Ouya was planned to launch with Onlive installed on it.

I am not suggesting that the Ouya is the console killer but I have a sneeky suspicion that if it sells well (its almost sold out 3 months prior to launch) one of the big companies will decide to invest. Imagine how much money Apple, Samsung or Google could throw into marketing a $99 console that would play games you already run on your phones.



Void said:

@Knux Yeah, 4th Gen sucked, those Pokemon were so stupid, they need to go back to the old days and make better Pokemon, Like Gen 1.



Davidiam007 said:

You know Microsoft monopolized the PC world I wouldn't be surprised to see which developers are in their pockets.



Davidiam007 said:

The ouya sounds awesome but my iPhone games and android games don't really captivate me that much.



Varia01 said:

WHAT?!? Almost every gaming company that published games for Xbox 360 and PS3 Published games for the Wii U. In fact, isn't Mass Effect 3 on the Wii U and was published by EA. I for one think that the Wii U's technology is awesome! I guess every person is an individual... At least there is other third-party gaming companies...



TheRealThanos said:

Same here to the second part of your comment.
I've gotten curious about the Ouya however by watching this YouTube series called "Ouya Graphics and Performance Test".
There are now seven in total and the one that most impressed me was the Need for Speed Most Wanted one, because it looks almost exactly like its Xbox360/PS3 counterparts:

And don't forget emulators like for the NES, GBA, Sega Megadrive/Genesis, SNES, Atari, N64 and in the near future probably also PS1 or higher.
All can be played because it is an open platform that is ALLOWED to be rooted.



MeloMan said:

In my opinion, if the Wii U is not in the "next gen" of PS4 and Nextbox, then that would mean that the Wii was back in the PS2/Xbox era, which is false. The Wii DEFINTELY was, and held it's own to an extent, in the PS360 generation, it was simply UNDERPOWERED compared to it's rivals. The Wii U COULD repeat this history, but the Wii U is DEFINITELY Next Gen... I fail to see where there's even a debate on this. Just because it isn't the highest of highest ends is irrelevant to if the Wii U's games will be directly competing with PS4/Nextbox's games of the same gen. puff puff. Ok, I'm fine now... I just don't see why this is so hard to figure out or needs debating...



Flashman said:

@TheRealThanos Like I said all it takes is one of the 3 companies I mentioned to decide it wants a piece of the action and the bottom drops out of traditional gaming!! I have already read rumours about Apple TV getting an app store for games in maybe the next version.

As much as people like to bang on about "Its not real gaming" it still completely buggered the handheld market everywhere (apart from Japan). Plus if you can play the same games you have already bought for your phone on it for no extra cost (which Apple already do between iPad and iPhone). Goodbye Next Gen!!



RoboConker said:

With all these gaming companies going bankrupt i dont know how the non-multimillion dollars companies are going to survive on the PS4 and the newxbox, because they are going to be really expensive to develope games on those 2 consoles.



TheRealThanos said:

I wouldn't go so far as to say Goodbye next gen, but I can see some stuff happening in the future because of titles like I mentioned that, although slightly less 'heavy on the graphics' are WAY cheaper in comparison, so people may want to take that graphical difference for granted if you can buy a console for 99 dollars or euros and pay 10 to 15 bucks for your triple A games when they're still brand new instead of 50 to 70. But first the Tegra chips need to get quite a bit more powerful for it to be a real threat on the graphical front as well.
All that being said, it's still an interesting little console because of all the possibilities.

As for it not being real gaming, that's a comment that I can agree upon as far as smart phones are concerned, but to me that mainly focusses on the difference in controls, e.g. touch screen vs tactile, real world controls. And I too prefer a real controller. In-between solutions like a blue tooth controller or a clip on joypad don't cut it for me. Handhelds should be complete gaming systems out of the box and to me therefore a smart phone isn't a direct competitor to a handheld console.

Maybe he divides everything by two...



TheRealThanos said:

Actually, no.
The AMD architecture that is heavily rumored to be in both consoles is going to be VERY user friendly so it will definitely NOT be where the expenses are. Maybe in licensing and so on, but not in figuring out the hardware. No one, neither console manufacturers nor software developers can allow this to happen because of a shrinking market and the current economy. It's just too big of a risk these days and they still need consumers to buy their products AND make a healthy profit in the long run. For all these and MANY more reasons, the next Xbox and PlayStation are NOT going to be insanely more powerful. At the most it will be around 4 times the processing power and twice/three times the memory, but no more. As I explained before in another article there's also no use: there is still an uncrossable line of native 1080p/60fps at the most, because of people not having TV's in their homes that can do better than that, so more memory or processing power than 4 times the Wii U would be a waste of money for Sony, who are still dealing with their HUGE losses to this day.
The other consoles will DEFINITELY be more powerful, but both companies themselves have already explained that their focus lies more on the social aspect than on pure power, and all software engines are fully scalable so there's hardly a threat there for the Wii U, since all consoles are now in HD, so not in a million years are we going to see a similar gap as last (this) gen.

What's with the 'oh dear'? I don't get what you're trying to say there. (unless it was about the "divides everything by two" comment which, admittedly, was a bad joke, but it was no more than that.) It's actually kind of strange, because most of the time we seem to think alike and I agree with what you say. By the way, maybe I mixed the sentences in the wrong order, but the part where I mentioned emulation wasn't related to the rooting comment. I meant to point that out in relation to the Android games.

How so?
The Ouya's already here and you are able to order one yourself if you are a programmer. It's definitely not the Phantom console:



Davidiam007 said:

Sorry for the typos. However the wii u is not under power.

The wii u is no slouch. I know you're probably referring to the CPU's clock speed of being 1.24ghz. Do you understand how they're architecture even works and that us much more efficient then both Xbox 360 and ps3's. that it has edram on it and that can transfer more data faster and efficiently and it's a huge l1 and l2 cache. Oh that it has gpgpu process that can handle a lot of the functions that the CPU would normally do. Instead of listening to develops who HAVEN'T develope a game on it listen to those who have. Gearbox who are developing Aliens: colonial marines state that there will be a very noticeable difference in the graphics department. Also take example trine 2 directors cut the wii u version is almost on par with the pc version and that's just a 2d side scroller. The developers for rayman said the wii u was so powerful that it ran smooth even when they forgot to compress the texture. Both ps3 and Xbox had fill rate issues. By the way before thq went under they apologized for the miss understanding about why metro: last light wasn't going to be on wii u is that they didn't have the man power. Look it up. Even the hacker Marcan said that it might not be a processor to write home about but don't dismiss it cause you can't compare clock for clock cause its architecture is different and know it doesn't bottle neck it cause gpgpu can handle a lot of what would normally been done on the CPU.



Davidiam007 said:

And I'm talking about developers who built the game from the ground up for the consoles and not the ports.



Davidiam007 said:

Sorry this is to no one personal. I just copied and pasted from a comment I wrote someone else on another site and just redid the opening sentence.



AVahne said:

I left the "Oh dear" comment there as a neutral comment until I could figure out the meaning of the "divides by two" joke. If it was a joke, I wasn't actually sure what you meant by it hahah...sorry if I confused you. (I was thinking the joke was about the EA guy's intelligence level, am I wrong?)
The whole rooting comment, I meant for everyone who reads it to try to get it out of their mind that rooting is the equivalent of jail-breaking on iOS; to those who think it's required to do anything cool on Android. Not saying I support illegal practices, but some people (not saying you) give me the impression that they think iOS and Android are the same...



TheRealThanos said:

Ah... good you mentioned that. I was already going through the list of comments and started wondering...

Thanks for clearing that up. To clarify my poor attempt at a joke: according to me we are in the eight gen, and he said four, so divided by two... (oh my god, it really WAS a bad joke, sorry about that) And the reason I mentioned the rooting at all is because the people behind the Ouya actually INVITE you to do so in their commercial trailer, so it's probably one of their marketing ploys.



AVahne said:

Ah yes, I see now. Yes they made sure to tell people that the process for rooting won't be difficult at all. It'll be great for people who want to use six-axis app on Ouya so they can use a Dual Shock 3 on bluetooth instead of the Ouya's native controller.

EDIT: Oh dear, so I was REALLY over-thinking about the meaning of that joke. No problems



TheRealThanos said:

The other day I read somewhere that Xbox 360 controllers are supported straight out of the box, so that seems to show which controller they prefer themselves. And besides all my Nintendo consoles I just happen to have a 360 lying around...



Neram said:

So pretty much what I get from this is that EA is totally snubbing the Wii U because they're underwhelmed by it, and instead looking forward to the next Xbox and PlayStation. I think the point that they're failing to see, perhaps due to their bullish outlook toward the so-called "8th Gen", is that there isn't going to be success on Nintendo's platform if you DON'T try to support it and actually release your games on it. You think by releasing the third iteration in the Mass Effect series (which is good, but clearly doesn't make sense) and a couple of your annual sports titles that you're going to be able to accurately test the Wii U market? How about competing with Black Ops: 2 and releasing Battlefield? Something that makes sense. You can't just blame the Wii U for your companies' bad strategy. I bet if you look at Ubisoft, they'd have something totally different to say about it, because they actually TRY.



AVahne said:

Android 4.0 onwards supports native gamepad support, so that may be the reason. However I believe that currently that mostly applies to controllers that have a wired connection to the device at the moment. So you may have to connect your 360 controller to your Ouya via USB to have it work right out of the box without messing with drivers or IME settings.



Will-75 said:

First off the Wii U has not even been out on the market for 3 months , for as long as I can remember there is always a slump after Christmas for everyone . Like a lot of the comments I've read I too buy a Nintendo console to play Nintendo games not 3rd party games , I think that Nintendo puts out systems that always have something unique , something that adds to the game experience therefore its a little harder for 3rd party's to just port a game I mean look PS3 and Xbox are basically the same thing I think that seems to be a problem most 3rd party developers dont want to add or do the extra .



TheRealThanos said:

Well, the article stated that the controller would work wirelessly through some custom bit of software. Probably similar to the Xbox 360 for PC dongle, except the Ouya itself seemingly IS the dongle, or at least software makes it act as such. Or something. Here's an article about it, that does confirm wireless although not straight out of the box, so that was my bad:

By the way: you have really made me VERY curious as to what the heck you thought I meant with my divide by two comment... Care to enlighten me?
If not, no biggie, just wondering...

It's really quite simple: the Ouya isn't a phone, merely a simple and small mid range PC-like motherboard (power-wise) built around a Tegra chip and a custom version of Android 4.0. Without the functional phone part and subsequent provider services and subscription cost it is very easy to sell such a device for such a low price.
Have you even checked the site or any documentation about it at all?
Or why not pose as a developer and order on for yourself? You can always make up some excuse later on...
Here's the site:
And YouTube is full of video clips by developers and game sites previewing and dissecting the device, so it seems to me that quite a lot of physical evidence of it actually existing is already there:



Captain_Balko said:

Meh. EA is a terrible company anyways. In fact, I remember reading somewhere that, a few years back, they were voted the WORST COMPANY IN AMERICA by consumers. They won a little award and everything.



BulbasaurusRex said:

Haven't we about reached the peak for video game graphics, anyway? Raw horsepower can always get better, sure, but how much better can the graphics really get?



SpaceApe said:

It is obvious he knows what is under the hood with the new Xbox and PS4 and he is comparing it to the Wii U. The Wii U needed to be something special but clearly as we have seen through sales it is mearly average. Why would you invest in average ?



TheRealThanos said:

Well, to give an example that's not yet mainstream but will be the focus for the future: 4K is visibly much, MUCH sharper and vibrant than full HD. (I've seen a comparison at a tech fair) Besides that something closer to home is a high-end gaming PC which can crank out visuals that put the current HD consoles' best games to shame, so yeah, there's still quite a bit of room for improvement.



Gamesake said:

EA is a joke. You guys should see the garbage EA spews out about STEAM on a regular basis.

@Captain_Balko EA has indeed always been a terrible company. They're known for buying up smaller talented companies and running them into the ground. They also have a love affair with DRM that could rival Sony. Add that to shady releases like FIFA 13 and it's no wonder why there's so much disgust for EA among gamers.



aaronsullivan said:

EA is big, powerful and has a huge variety of titles. Dismissing it out of hand is just the type of thing people do to Nintendo that is so frustrating to fans like most of us.

Like it or not, it does affect the success of Wii U if a huge publisher dismisses it as unexciting.

As a business it might end up being the smart move, but missing out on how awesome the GamePad and asynchronous play is and the great MiiVerse community is a bad choice when it comes to the art of game design and progressing the industry. I mean, seriously, the game market is apparently CONTRACTING and it seems like he is trying to drum up excitement over pretty much more of the same "nickel and dime-ing" that builds a resentment from game fans.

Once Microsoft and Sony reveal their plans it will be good to reassess his statement, but it's pretty discouraging.

The way the US economy is going I wonder if they'll both try to launch by the end of the year. Microsoft has had so many failed hardware launches in the last year I wonder if it has the nerve. Probably desperation will be good motivation.

I do love my Wii U but I was hoping Nintendo might break through the third party problem. So far it's looking kinda bad. At least the eShop and openness to indies seems to be a bright spot.



t_vo said:

I think this really prooves that there was some kind of falling out between EA and Nintendo, and EA basically told them that they will not support their system with any direct investment. However, I think when EA goes to release their first games for the PS4 and Nextbox, they'll see the small install base in the first year of those systems, and see the larger install base of the Wii U and port those "next" gen's over to the Wii'U, just to help cover the costs of the inherently lower software sales on newly realeased hardware.



CharbroiledEwok said:

I feel like the entire industry is about to experience a major upheaval. The mega-publishers (like EA) have become greedy, the consumers are split into warring factions, and the concept of "gaming value" has become muddied with the ubiquity of smartphones in the middle of a global recession.

I don't see how Sony and MS can make their next systems profitable, if only rich/financially irresponsible people can afford their products. Nintendo took the conservative route with the 3DS and Wii U - and they're STILL struggling against economic realities! All this tech comes with a price, people...



CaPPa said:

Now I'd never usually want a company to struggle but I really do hope that EA invests huge amounts in the next Xbox/Playstation and that it turns out to be a huge loss for them (if they have similar launches to PS3 for example). They could do with being taken down a peg or two.

I don't understand how this 'gen 4' of EA's is going to vastly overpower the Wii U though unless they are going to be $600 consoles, in which case they would almost certainly fail.

It seems more likely that EA is just being spiteful because Nintendo turned down their proposed online dominance. That isn't a good way to plan business strategies though and they deserve to flop if that really is the case (that and calling it gen 4 instead of gen 8 because gaming didn't start with Sony).



DaemonSword said:

@Captain_Balko Indeed, EA SUX. My hatred for them goes back to the Ultima series and how they sucked Origin Systems dry. In 1990, Origin openly based several bloodthirsty pirates in Ultima VI on senior EA employees Trip Hawkins (Captain Hawkins), Joe Ybarra (Old Ybarra), Bing Gordon (Alastor Gordon) and Steward Bonn (Bonn). "Hawkins was a dreaded pirate who sailed the Britannian seas on his ship 'The Empire,' prior to the events of Ultima VI. His cruelty eventually caused him to be murdered by his own crew, who split up the map to his treasures amongst themselves." Richard Garriott also named a morgue after Hawkins. Hawkins' tombstone reads: "Here lies Captain Hawkins. He died a hard death and he deserved it." This gives an idea how much his crew hated him. The practice continued in Ultima VII wherein three generators formed the EA logo, the initials of the "bad guys" Elizabeth and Abraham were "EA," and the Guardian was the "Destroyer of Worlds" (Origin's motto was "We Create Worlds").



NintyMan said:

I remember when Mr. Riccitello was so excited for the Wii U that he even got the chance to speak on Nintendo's stage at E3 2011. This explains why EA hasn't said much about the Wii U since then.

I don't play EA's games, but it would be a bit of a missed opportunity if it decided to neglect the Wii U in favor of Microsoft's and Sony's new consoles. We all know they're going to end up being more powerful than the Wii U, but they will also be more expensive as well. Nintendo's trying to strike a balance with pricing, but in this economy, the whole game industry is facing quite a challenge.



luminalace said:

Until 3rd party games sell better on Nintendo p,atforms, and I mean multi platform games, developers like EA will always focus more on systems from Sony and MS. Sad but true.



Henmii said:

There goes the "relationship" between Nintendo and EA (wich was never really there to begin with)!



Nukarmer said:

Listen, guys, who in the world cares about which gen it is now? As long as Nintendo keeps giving me their own great new games and HD-remakes of their old classic titles, I'm fine.

If 3rd parties decide to bring their titles to Wii U - I'd be happy to buy the ones that really utilize the Wii U Gamepad in an inventive way. But let's be frank: if it's just a map and an inventory, but with poorer graphics compared to next gen or PC versions - why would I buy a Wii U-version of such a game?

Nintendo's problem with 3rd parties is that they don't believe that the average guy perceives Nintendo's Wii U as the true new gen, and there are reasons for that. Nintendo decided to ship Wii U with a tablet at the expense of processing power (let's face it, the graphics are current gen, not next gen). Why? Because the market says you have to keep the retail price of your console within certain psycologocal limits ($300-400), which truly I don't understand. I would invest $500-600 into a new console that would give me not only a tablet-like gamepad, but also a powerful CPU, more memory, etc. If you compare these extra $200 with the money people are obviously ready to spend on games (they always complain about lack of games, don't they?), it's nothing, really.

I now prefer to play my current gen games on PC: because it easily beats any console in terms of graphics quality, frame rate and overall stability. But I still keep my PS3 and X360 to play the scanty but great exclusives. And near to them is my Wii, where I play my Marios, Zeldas, Metroids and Kirbies. And whoever says these games are not good enough just because they are not in HD - they simply do not love videogames. Because as long as Nintendo makes great games that I cannot play anywhere else - I will keep supporting Nintendo and buy their 1st party titles, most of them, at least.



Drewroxsox said:

I still think that Nintendo is holding back something with the WiiU because to me, it's not all that mind blowing. Maybe at e3 Nintendo will drop a bomb that'll make everyone swoon to the WiiU...



Truelovetat said:

I think the exact thing. The Wii U so far is great but like you said, I think they are holding back. I think with MS and Sony showing off their new systems at E3, I'm sure Nintendo must have something to surprise us. Well let's hope so.



Zombie_Barioth said:

@Nukarmer The PS3's launch price is your answer, it was leaps and bounds above last gen but still struggled despite the economy being much better at the time. Enthusiasts might be willing to shell out for nicer specs and performance but not mainstream consumers, not then and especially not now.

Just about everything can do movies and music these days so that isn't a selling point anymore, they need something that only their device can do. Thats why I think aiming to be your entertainment hub is the way to go. They should be setup to pull everything together in one easy to use box, a user friendly HTPC if you will.

Despite the rumored specs I doubt most games will utilize it all, not if they aim to focus on socializing and multitasking (which an 8-core CPU is great for). I'd say at best game performance between Wii U and PS4/720 will be about what you'd expect going from minimum to recommended specs for PC games.



TheRealThanos said:

I looked up the JooJoo you mentioned, but to me that seems totally off topic, since it's a tablet (now called the Crunchpad) but more importantly, it was published and it's here. You're comment seems to suggest that it was vaporware, but it's not, and neither is the Ouya.



Reala said:

If ouya is a scam the square enix and namco bandai are in on it too, since they are both set to release titles for it, its a perfectly legit console just a bit different to the norm is all.



tedko said:


I couldn't agree more. I've been playing Nintendo games for around 25 years and have always preferred them. I have no interest in EA games and have not enjoyed the ones I've played. As long as Nintendo continues to be successful and profitable so that they keep making awesome games, that's all I care about and if some developers ignore them, so what.



UnseatingKDawg said:

Aaah, who needs 'em? From what I've heard, most EA games lack. These guys think they know a console? Let's see them make one themselves, and then we'll see how high and mighty they are.



GreenDream said:

Everything EA touches, they turn into irradiated, anti-developer slop. The less influence EA has over Nintendo, the better.

Riccitello's comments are less a jab towards Nintendo, and more a statement of ignorance towards the current PC hardware. That's scary, for someone who doesn't understand something to be an executive of that thing's industry... even Yamauchi, who hated using his own company's products, understood games to a certain degree, due to his "business knack" and Go skill.



GreenDream said:

@Zombie_Barioth That depends on the game. My PC setup surpassed the minimum specs for the Witcher 2 when it first came out, with only the graphics card (Geforce 9800 GT) cutting it close, yet it would not run beyond a perpetually lurching crawl of 10 fps! Not even at the lowest settings. I was forced to upgrade. After installing a newer graphics card, my setup runs the game at max settings without significant hiccups.

On the other hand, the setup ran the Final Fantasy 14 opening cinema in-game without hassle, despite almost not even making minimum requirements. Yet, the more powerful card I substituted in has very bad screen tearing during the same cinema.

All of your other points are well-founded, though.



Zombie_Barioth said:

@GreenDream I was speaking in general terms (and meant something like Skyrim's requirements) but your right it depends on the game and your settings. You could even get a budget laptop to run a game like Skyrim to run at playable framerates if you know what your doing.



TreesenHauser said:

Everyone's talking about EA and console "gens."

And I'm just sitting here getting ready to play more Wii U. For me, console specs and graphical power never meant anything--only the raw gameplay value, which is why Nintendo's always been #1 for me.



Ren said:

This is NOT a repeat of the Wii thing. As soon as people started playing the Wii and it was impossible to find in stores all the developers saw the money there and tried some things with it, as weak as it was in comparison; the motion controls were intriguing and are still awesome.
The WiiU, not so much. It's out, we've all tried it and uh... it's ok, but it's barely matching the current gen ports right now; that doesn't look promising. Sure it's a new system made by arguably the best game software developer on the planet so theres some neat things, but does it really represent the "next gen". time will tell. If you're investing in game companies you have to look at these things and be realistic; It's plain to any consumer that the other current consoles are doing the same things now that the WiiU is doing so why buy a whole new console with a fraction of the game selection? Investors can see that as well.



Emaan said:

I've always thought Nintendo does their own thing regardless of the competition. The Wii U is an upgrade to the Wii, which was last generation, for Nintendo. People shouldn't be concerned with how it improves over the PS3 and Xbox 360 because the Wii U isn't a successor to those systems. It's next generation in the sense that it's a new home console with a unique concept we haven't seen before. I fail to understand how this isn't enough to qualify.

The video game industry has become so cynical about how graphics seem to be the only thing that matters. In my opinion, if a console can revolutionize the way we play video games, that more than justifies it being next generation.



MikComposer said:

Don't worry people, WU chipset is cutting edge and it's build very elegantly. If the rumored specs for ps4 and 720 are to be true, then WU chipset is acctuly 4 times faster in processing information, with faster access to internal memory, while on those two consoles devs can throw more things at it, thought really "jaguar" sounds like its amd version of intels aion. Basically these sound like laptops. The graphics might be slightly sharper, but it is down to developers to make it look good. If compared to pc, the graphics on new consoles will run at high/ultra while wu will run on medium/high, which in modern day makes only difference to geeks. Also WU has got dsp, a dedicated sound processing unit, while in those two other consoles sound will be processed on one of the cores. And as someone who does music compositions and production, sounds puts a lot of strain on cpu.

Dude is basically saying that gen 4 will let them put frostbyte powered games on high or ultra settings and that due to pc like architecture they can minize expenses on ports. But there might be something more to that.

Wii U need a year or two of experimental period before they will start cranking up its capabilities. The games we will see this year will look good but will not be pushing the console too much.



FullbringIchigo said:

hey EA can you count? tell you what here is a list of console by generation (in reverse) so your simple minds can understand

8th: Wii U, PS4, Nextbox
7th: PS3, XBOX 360, Wii
6th: PS2, XBOX, Gamecube, Dreamcast
5th: PS1, Sega Saturn, Nintendo 64, 3DO
4th: PC Engine/TurboGrafx-16/TurboGrafx, Sega Genesis/Mega Drive, Super Nintendo Entertainment System, Neo Geo
3rd: Nintendo Entertainment System/Famicom, Sega Master System, Atari 7800
2nd: Atari 2600, Atari 5200, Intellivision, Colicovision, Magnavox Odyssey
1st: Odyssey, Telstar, Atari PONG (if i put more this list could go on forever)

see the "next gen" has already started power has nothing to do with it

Leave A Comment

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