Although Nintendo never likes to talk specs, its new HD Wii U could be up to 50% more powerful than the PS3 and Xbox 360.
That's if estimates from developers, who apparently told Sterne Agee analyst Arvind Bhatia as much, turn out to be accurate.
Its 1080p capability is thought to be on par with Xbox 360 and PS3, but according to Bhatia multiple developers have discovered Wii U's internals to be far more powerful than generally expected.
"Some of the developers we spoke to indicated to us that the console will have 50% more processing power compared to the PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360. This is yet to be confirmed by Nintendo," said Bhatia.
While the platform holder has become known for releasing lower-powered hardware at a low cost, Nintendo boss Satoru Iwata has already admitted that the Wii U hardware isn't going to be cheap, suggesting there will indeed be some serious power under its hood.
Comments
90 comments so far...
STE MO on 13 Jun '11 said:
If it wasn't more powerful I would be worried if I was Ninty.
glennerzzz on 13 Jun '11 said:
Unlikely. I would have thought, given the complexity and likely cost of the controller alone to manufacture, that the processor would be one of the areas in which Nintendo would have to cut corners if they aim to achieve a similarly low retail price point as the one that made the Wii so successful.
kirankara on 13 Jun '11 said:
Except a processor that is 50% more powerful isn't that expensive these days, nor is a better gpu, and the controllers really aren't that expensive to make at all. They have no separate processors and it's not multi touch screen, so it's not going to be that hard to manufacture a more powerful console at a price thats competitive with ps3 and 360. I'd expect both 360 and ps3 to have price drops in near future anyway.
damoxuk on 13 Jun '11 said:
It's all void if the price is too high anyway. By the time Wii-U will be out PS3/360 will have dropped in price more and would be gearing up for next gen proper not some halfway house.
Still i'll buy it for the Mario/Zelda HD goodness - multiplats possibly IF they are in 1080p and the ps3/360 versions are the usual 720p.
starvinbull on 13 Jun '11 said:
The Wii U outputs at 1080p AND outputs visuals (potentially graphically intensive visuals) on the controller. 50% is significantly better than the potential of the PS3 but I'd be very surprised if we see significantly better graphics.
An open question to other posters, who do Nintendo have that will push the hardware like a Crytek, Naughty Dog or ID?
Better framerates? Yes. 1080p? Yes. Anything more than that? I'm doubtful but would like to see it.
shiwayb on 13 Jun '11 said:
Erm, I'm sure Crytek will get on Board if its powerful...
rick on 13 Jun '11 said:
That's the least it should be when you consider Moores Law.
I wonder what theoretical percentage increase they could achieve putting costs aside.
HeavenlyGamer on 13 Jun '11 said:
I wouldn't be surprised if this turned out to be real. You shouldn't forget that the tech in PS3/360 is already 6/7 years old, so 50% increase in power isn't that revolutionary if you consider how long it has been since the PS3/360 were released.
Barca Azul on 13 Jun '11 said:
Could well be but it will most likely get held back on 3rd party games by the 360 and PS3.
It could well be a half way house to the next gen of the other two though.
MD1500 on 13 Jun '11 said:
Crytek says CryEngine will support Wii U.
http://www.next-gen.biz/news/crytek-cry ... port-wii-u
markyR on 13 Jun '11 said:
Well dddduuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr If nintendo couldn't build a console that's more powerful then 6 year old tech they should just quit the industry!!
But it also gives me more confidence that the PSVITA is more powerful then people think! Not as powerful as a PS3 but not far off I think.
kirankara on 13 Jun '11 said:
Not really , by all accounts Nintendo have gone out way to make it easy to program for and port over to the wii u, hence lots of devs getting on board, and so should be relatively easy to harness any extra power in terms of performance or higher res textures, increase AA etc
wwinterj on 13 Jun '11 said:
At this point the price will make or brake the Wii U for me. If it's at a good price then I'm sole if not I'll wait for a price drop. I know the console will be more then £200 so chances are I'll wait for a price drop. On the plus side when I do get around to getting one there will be better exclusive games out for it.
I wouldn't pay over £200 for a console at the point. My 360,PS3 and Wii will do the job until a price drop comes and I'll upgrade my Wii to this.
Ali_ on 13 Jun '11 said:
So, Nintendo will have the most powerful console for around 12-24 months? And then it's business as usual as they pull into the inside lane to be overtaken again.
originalbadboy on 13 Jun '11 said:
The WiiU specs are not final yet anyway ... so all this speculation is purely academic at the moment ... It could end up being less powerful ... it could end up being more.
If it was 50% more powerful than current gen I would consider that next gen specs. I dont understand the logic where someone sees 50% more power therefore, its only 'half way ' into the next gen. Thats completely bonkers logic.
If its sigfincantly better than the 360 & PS3 then its next gen ... its as simple as that.
Personally I couldnt care less , its fairly obvious that this is at least as powerful as current gen consoles, which in all honesty is good enough for me, if it means I get to play new Mario games, and great graphics. Anything else is a bonus ..
Im more worried about online services etc myself.
icedmetal57 on 14 Jun '11 said:
Yup, that's how technology works. I do have faith in their ability to deliver a powerful console. The original Nintendo sold for around $600 upon release from what I remember, sure it was sort of a new technology so there wasn't a lot of competition as far as price goes, but that doesn't matter too much. When the PS3 was released it was around $600 and was being sold second-hand through online auction sites, e.g. Ebay, and the likes for upwards of a few thousand dollars. Price will definitely affect the number of sales but by the time it's released and ready to ship the price of that hardware will go down so it'll be cheaper to manufacture and sell at a lower price than one may think. I'd assume it's got hardware equivalent to a decent to high-end PC which means within a year or two when it is actually released it'll be much cheaper yet still fairly powerful and definitely more so than the current consoles.
chamony on 14 Jun '11 said:
if you go by ps3 getting a fair amount of poor 360 ports then you can guarantee wii u will get MORE than its fair share,
i cant see many companies doing more than converting for the controller for older titles, they might put a bit more effort into new multi platform titles, but would they?
and how much processor will the controller use if the screens on and streaming something different to the tv
eg rear view mirror on a car game.....
Welsh Jester on 14 Jun '11 said:
I'm hoping more than 20% at least, ninty would finally be in a decent position than behind constantly.
50% is probably optimistic.. what are the core speeds of the 360 CPU in this wii?
remember when they bulls**tted us about the PSP 2 being PS3 power? dev's said that themselves and i knew it wasnt i even posted saying it wouldn't be.. then they come out saying it's between ps2/ps3 which is exactly what i said.
don't trust it.
sweatyBallacks on 14 Jun '11 said:
Well I hope it is. And it should be, if they are to charge a premium for it.
Releasing a Wii U that had the same power as PS3/360 would be like Blackberry releasing a new smartphone that has the same power as years old Android phones and charging significantly more for the device. Oh hold on they did. Hence the dive in their share of the smartphone market.
Actually maybe that comparison is sh*t I just wanted to have a dig at BB.
Welsh Jester on 14 Jun '11 said:
They charge a premium for 3DS and it uses components roughly half the cost of the retail price.
ricflair on 14 Jun '11 said:
I'd imagine Nintendo's in house studios will do a lot of the pushing of the hardware, like they always do. If it's easy to make games for they won't need an expert like Naughty Dog, any talented multi platform developer should be able to get the best from it.
God knows if this is true though. But the only nintendo home console to be the least powerful was the wii, before that they had plenty of power. Although look where that got them.
Imaduck on 14 Jun '11 said:
Whatever the case, bear in mind how long it takes to truelly unlock a console's potential. Compare PS3/360 release games to current releases. SO, if these guys aren't talking out their ass, which seems unlikely be that good or bad, I don't think we'll see the WiiU topping the visuals or perhaps even scratching at the top edge of the other consoles before the nex gen is out. Allow 3-5 years for people to truelly learn what it can do, then add 3 for a AAA game developed to max it out ...... yeah
On top of that, Nintendo do charge through the roof. From a hardware perspective, as in, the bits in the box, the Wii is an absolute ripoff. The 360 and PS3 are good value now for what you get. Fine line to walk.
Zero_Cool on 14 Jun '11 said:
Well, it wouldn't be hard to make the system better than the 360/PS3 as such tech is 6 years old. The 360/PS3 are yesterdays news...
jtthegame on 14 Jun '11 said:
i would think that it is more powerful if it was not i would wonder what was going on
Littlebags on 14 Jun '11 said:
Just curious where this quote came from, "Its 1080p capability is thought to be on par with Xbox 360 and PS3, but according to Bhatia multiple developers have discovered Wii U's internals to be far more powerful than generally expected"?I couldn't find in the source article etc.
starvinbull on 14 Jun '11 said:
I know that Nintendo normally do a great job of making their first party games look extra nice but I can't see Kokiri village looking as detailed as the nepalise village from UC2. Nintendo have to some extent always been great at making unrealistic games but that may mean that the next Metroid will not recieve the kind of attention to detail and bleeding edge technology of a game like Crysis 2? I think that for a company that has been making family friendly party games for the last 6 years the shift in production values and the budget bumps that will be required on every title may not come.
I personally won't be buying the console no matter how much it costs or what franchises are continued on it because after buying the DS, Wii and 3DS I have been left continually disapointed and I haven't enjoyed bread and butter Nintendo games like Zelda and Mario Kart since their N64 or SNES predecessors.
I'm not saying the Wii U won't be great, just that I don't have confidence in Nintendo to create gaming experiences that appeal to me.
Balladeer on 14 Jun '11 said:
Fair enough if you don't like Nintendo's style, but you can't deny that they'll push the hardware. And maybe they won't concentrate as hard on the details as Naughty Dog, but they'll produce some stunning yet unrealistic vistas.
If you are solely a gritty realism fan, though, I wonder why you've stuck with the company for this long. Gritty realism is not what they do.
i am james on 14 Jun '11 said:
its also 3 years late
roynluc on 14 Jun '11 said:
Just click the link to the original article, it's the first paragraph that you read.
"Wii U will be HD, supporting up to 1080p resolution just like Xbox 360 and PS3, but beyond that it's unclear how powerful the hardware will ultimately be when it ships sometime next year. Nintendo never provides a full breakdown, although the company did say that the form factor is "near final." While many assumed Wii U would be on par with the current HD consoles, word is coming in from developers that it's quite a bit more powerful."
Athrun888 on 14 Jun '11 said:
I love how some people have done a backflip on Nintendo, before the Wii U was shown and we started hearing details about it everyone was all "oh Nintendo isn't actually a part of the industry anyway so who cares" (basically translated into: "I don't want to admit Nintendo were able to take a vastly inferior system tech wise and be way more successful than my favourite company Sony/MS").
And now that it might actually be substantially more powerful than the PS3/360 (anyone who thinks 50% is a small figure needs a reality check) everyone's going "Oh it'll be obsolete in a couple of years anyway", completely forgetting that this gen (hopefully) still has a fair few years left in it, and that "the next gen" might actually be a 50-65% increase on this one anyway, chances are we'll have another PS2/Gamecube/Xbox scenario, with the new Wii being the least powerful.
rbt2 on 14 Jun '11 said:
Why don't we just all agree that WiiU is going to be more powerful and leave it at that.
That is how the internet works, isn't it?
Balladeer on 14 Jun '11 said:
gdkjones on 14 Jun '11 said:
Crytek for one have just announced yesterday that their dev kit is definately capable of running Cryengine and that they definately will be developing for the new console. You are of course entitled to be doubtful but here´s the link.
http://www.next-gen.biz/news/crytek-cry ... port-wii-u
I would also assume that over the coming weeks we will hear of more developers making announcements like this. I think Nintendo´s reveal at E3 could have better explained the console but it seems obvious that there is great potential for every gamer here, even those who still think that high end graphics does a good game make.
hollywood111 on 14 Jun '11 said:
I dont see who's gonna buy this console?, the current New nintendo wii fan base wont be intrested & the 360 & PS3 owners, well they are already playing Crytek & Epic games & looking at the next generation of their consoles?.
rak49 on 14 Jun '11 said:
Nintendo have gone in a bit too early imo. All Sony/Microsoft will have to do is hold on for 2/3 more years (not difficult) and their specs will wipe the floor with the Wii-U. That said Nintendo will live off the casual gamer and fans of their exclusives so they will make their bucks before the console becomes the next Wii shaped book end and survive comfortably to make more 'innovation'.
theholyone on 14 Jun '11 said:
Nintendo have previously stated that they don't sell hardware at a loss. They also don't manufacture the components that make a console. This new console is going to be very expensive. The PS3 launch price was high and Sony was subsidising that in a massive way. They also manufacture most of their own components. This is going to be £500 plus. Remember Sony has only just got the cost of manufacture below their trade price on six year old tech.
This machine is either going to be down graded spec wise, or Nindendo are going to sell at a loss and probably kill themselves off in the process.
Big gamble on a Sony PS3 beating level I think.
mangle on 14 Jun '11 said:
I think the main reason the PS3 sold so highly initially is down to the Bluray drive.
I know it states somewhere that the Wii U will also use a proprietry disc, but the GC did also and that wasn't overtly expensive at launch. While I don't expect Nintendo to give the thing away, I also wouldn't expect PS3 launch prices either.
As for the argument about the Wii U becoming obsolete when MS and Sony realease their new, more powerful consoles - er, have you paid attention at all to what happened this gen? The Wii was less powerful than an iPhone yet it still outsold the competition :/
50% extra power sounds good to me - current gen games like UC2 running at 1080p? Yes pleases
You kind of p**sed me off last gen, Nintendo, so please make it good this time
gramreaper666 on 14 Jun '11 said:
1080p WOW THATS NEW
( 
)
yet most games still offer only 720p (wow now all 3 consoles are about the same, you wonder why we need all 3
)
Balladeer on 14 Jun '11 said:
You're right! It's not like they have any software exclusives - oh wait.
hollywood111 on 14 Jun '11 said:
You only need a Nintendo console if you enjoy playing simple childrens games like Pokemon.... I mean!.. ermmm sorry
Balladeer on 14 Jun '11 said:
http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/54/facepalm_implied.jpg
tmten on 14 Jun '11 said:
Well, as someone stated above, Moores law alone would allow for a 50% increase, never mind better architecture. It's being made on a 32nm SOI process, and I don't doubt for one second that the Wii U is significantly faster than the current consoles.
The problem for Nintendo is that they've showed their hand first, but they aren't actually playing it 'til next year, when possibly both Sony and Microsoft's next gen will be revealed, stealing the thunder (and press coverage) from them. And they'll both be an order of magnitude faster again. We're talking movie quality CGI here, in real-time. Nintendo will once again be a generation behind visually and relying on gimmicks, parents of young children, and the undoubted quality of their first party games to carry them through. Plus ca change.
Dewin on 14 Jun '11 said:
50% more powerful doesn't mean anything. For everyone who thinks this is "next gen", think again. Processor power doubles every 18 months or so. If this is 50% more powerfull than a ps3 (which was released in Nov 2006), this spec is from around 9 months after that, say july 2007. Hardly a next gen spec. The ps4 and the 720 (or whatever), will probably be 4 to 5 times as powerful than this generation. And just look at what high end pc's can push right now. They still will give the Wii U a run for its money, and as the Wii U isn't out till next year, PC will just grow more powerful up till that point.
So are you gonna jump ship for that 50% more? Its nice you can play your favourite HC games in better resolution. True. But will your friends be there, online, with you? And how about all those Achievement points and Trophy's? Do you want to start over for that? Besides, the new controller looks pretty cool with that screen, i'll admit. But i wouldn't want to play an evening MW3 on it. On any Nintendo controller for that matter. Way to uncomfortable. Give me a 360/ps3 controller any day.
hollywood111 on 14 Jun '11 said:
It doesn’t matter the only people who will be using that extra power is developers who are making exclusives for the Wii-U.
No way are people like Epic, DICE & Crytek spending time making one game for Nintendo & then one for the PS3 & 360.
tmten on 14 Jun '11 said:
"this spec is from around 9 months after that, say july 2007"
actually Dewin, you're not too far off. we know that the gpu in the Wii U will be AMD r700 based, and the r600 on which r700 was based (r700 was mainly just a die shrink with a few tweaks over r600) launched in Nov '07. also, the fact the both the r600 based hd 3870, and the r700 based hd 4670 are both exactly 50% faster in shader ops (at equal clocks) than the xenos inside the xbox 360 (which has roughly the equivalent of 240 r700 level shaders) is no coincidence. i've been speculating for a while that a hd 4670 level chip is a reasonable target for what we now know as the Wii U, considering the fact that there are massive heat and power restrictions in the type of small and passively cooled design that Nintendo are aiming for. so yeah, it'll still be recognisably 'current gen'.
_Marty_ on 14 Jun '11 said:
I'd definitely consider it. I have a Wii and 360 currently. How does that affect your pop-quiz?
HeavenlyGamer on 14 Jun '11 said:
I will! There are a lot of gamers who own a 360/PS3 and would love to play new Mario/Zelda games in HD. Haven't played Mario games since the N64, but until now I haven't played a platform game on any other console that beats Mario. So yes, I can't wait for the Wii U.
KK-Headcharge78 on 14 Jun '11 said:
Talk about a non story! Firstly it should be more powerful becuase it's competiong with the next gen not this one and I shall demonstrate no surprise when the next MS and Sony machines blow this machines specs out of the window.
Or did you think is was competing with the 360 and PS3?
ricflair on 14 Jun '11 said:
The last six years of a 25 year plus history. Fair enough they've done Wii Music/Fit/Sports etc, but they've still brought out some brilliant games in that time. The production values on Galaxy are amazing. I'd rather have the focus on production go on aesthetics and gameplay than realism and detail. It seems many people don't feel the same.
If the console is able to run the PS3/360 stuff with better frame rates, less tear, higher resolution that will be great and fair enough you're not into it. If it's more powerful and easy to program for, you should be able to get the benefit from it. I personally would be happy to forgo the Sony and MS exclusives, and just have a Nintendo console and all the best the third parties have to offer.
hollywood111 on 14 Jun '11 said:
You'd consider it, but if MS announce the new 720 (whatever) you'd still get this?, considering any big Mario or zelda exclusives will probably have a Wii release too?.
roynluc on 14 Jun '11 said:
I'll get it, as well as the next Xbox and PlayStation. I'm a gamer, as well as a gadget nut, and like games from all 3 platforms.
KippDynamite on 14 Jun '11 said:
I don't want to wait 5+ years for a zelda game like I have with the wii, no matter how powerful the system is.
Balladeer on 14 Jun '11 said:
In the same way that all the Uncharted games came out on the PS2?
starvinbull on 14 Jun '11 said:
Nah I like Nintendo's style I just don't think it's as relevant anymore as it once was. Zelda for instance was killed for me the day I completed Shadow of the Colossus. Twilight Princess and the 2 DS Zeldas were hugely disappointing for me.
If I were to sum up my opinion I'd say that Nintendo mastered the 2D era, they master the early 3D era but in the post 3D era I don't think they have shown that they can mix it with the best... yet.
Bear in mind that while Nintendo have been fannying around with party games and puppy raising sims video games have evolved many times over.
Balladeer on 14 Jun '11 said:
Well I agree with you on the DS Zeldas, although not on TP, but I think the rest of your post is very much a matter of opinion. Ask most people who own all three consoles what they think of the Mario Galaxy games. Go on, I dare you. And what about Donkey Kong Country Returns, a Retro-produced but Nintendo-developed (or is it the other way round?) hardcore gem? Same for S&P2. To say they've just been "fannying around with party games and puppy raising" is to purposefully overlook most of their recent work.
And for Zelda, I've never played SotC (want to though) but aren't they very different experiences? One is sixteen boss fights and loneliness, the other is... Zelda. Anyway, a lot of people would agree that recent Zeldas have been disappointing, but there's still SS to come, which features FLYING LINK and therefore axiomatically cannot be bad.
starvinbull on 14 Jun '11 said:
I'd be very surprised to see much of a graphical leap with the new Sony console or the new M$ console purely because it's an expensive business at a time when they have both been getting their arses kicked by a rejigged gamecube.
My 3 predictions for the 720 would be:
1. 1GB ram max
2. A CPU equivalent to a quad core i5
3. Upgraded DVD format with 15gb+ space
starvinbull on 14 Jun '11 said:
Mario Galaxy smokes all other retro platformers no doubt and gameplay wise it's a great game, it isn't a modern game though and it won't lead the way like Mario 64 did.
SotC is stark and challenging in the same way that demons souls is. It has a beautiful unique art style. It has one of the best video game landscapes ever. It forces you to assess everything around you to beat it's most difficult challenges.
The story is presented with great tact using more than just words to demonstrate what is happening. It does many of the things Zelda does but better, platforming, horse riding, archery.
In my opinion the 3 best games of the last generation were SotC, Oddworld Stranger and Super Monkey Ball.
liveswired on 14 Jun '11 said:
50% has completely taken me by surprise. Should be more than enough to render current games at full 1080p 60fps and not the usual 576/600/720p and fake '1080' we see on the 360/ps3.
kimoak on 14 Jun '11 said:
I am one of the people that Nintendo are aiming at too. I don't own any of these so-called next gen consoles and nor do I want to. I have a PC for my core games and Wii for something different. It will be natural for me to jump to the next Nintendo machine. The more hardcore games may give me a slight dilemma on what version to buy, but we'll have to wait and see th ereal differences between the Console version on the Wii U to my PC I currently have.
Besides the 360 and PS3 do a good job visually against PC already due to obvious speculation that PC hardware is not really pushed anywhere to it's limits. When you look at the numbers the games should really beat the crap out of consoles, but I don't think they do. So will be interesting to actually see what the differences are in the end. Frame rates are obviously the first thing.
g_marrs on 14 Jun '11 said:
Depends on your viewpoint. You're assuming that the others are going to move beyond a 50% jump in power. Also, if you look at it this way that Nintendo is beginning the next generation, then MS and Sony are playing catch up. They'll release a new console maybe equal or slightly more powerful 2-3 years after Wii-U and within 2-3 years of the end of Wii-U's generation. This is shaping up more or less how I imagined a successful tactic to explain the Wii might work, Nintendo have changed the generational leap with the Wii stall, ensuring that they always begin the next generation with more powerful but still relatively affordable technology and still achieve a proximity to the end of the generation that their competitors will also be out of sync with. Having captured the casuals, will the core crowd of the competitors honestly be able to sit with lesser powered consoles for 2-3 years?
It's an interesting dilemma. If Nintendo return to a 4-5 year cycle and both their competitors are in the position of being either too late prior to the Wii's next shift, or, having to produce a console that jumps forward a generation and a half to two generations to ensure the cycle moves back in their favour. That would be an expensive prospect for the competitors and likely the consumers who might buy those consoles.
I think Nintendo are playing a game plan and have been for the last few years leading up to this point.
KippDynamite on 14 Jun '11 said:
I've heard a few people state that it is part of Nintendos strategy to produce a cheap console despite the fact that Iwata said that it "won't be cheap."
Darkwun on 14 Jun '11 said:
for those talking of next generation (ps4/720) being several times more powerful than this gen and pffering real type visuals, you have little understanding of the cpnsole market. this is not the pc universe, and you cant just put out a mega powerful console and tell developers to make games for it. theres been a MASSIVE and very public outcry from developers to hold back on making massive power house consoles. pushing these to their limits wpuld cripple the industry to near 1980 like levels. only the giant companies could survive in this climate and they would need to sell MILLIONS before turning over a profit. the next generation will not keep up to standard with the top line of pc's, and probably never will (untill we reach a plateau in graphical quality which were WAY off from). its a known fact that multiplatform console gaming actually holds back the pc counterparts. so expecting a 400% increase on the ps3's power is ridiculous. the truth is, financially, we just dont know how much more powerful the next generation will be, but as a halfway step, i think-if accurate-50% is a good standpoint for nintendo. it wont get the most out of this generation (bar exclusives) but at least into next gen it it should survive an overlap til nintendo release their (better named) next console. i have several consoles, and this has potential... its a purchase for me, whether its day one or not, ill wait and see
KK-Headcharge78 on 14 Jun '11 said:
Do you live in a dreamworld?
tmten on 14 Jun '11 said:
"I'd be very surprised to see much of a graphical leap with the new Sony console or the new M$ console"
"MS and Sony are playing catch up. They'll release a new console maybe equal or slightly more powerful 2-3 years after Wii-U"
no, no, no, and no. the next gen consoles from both ms and sony will have full hardware tessellation, at least several gigs of ram, will be possibly capable of ray-tracing, or at least far more adaptable with a far more programmable pipeline - something akin to dx12 - and an extremely capable cpu. anything less just wouldn't be worth it. you're thinking too small; think big, think movie quality cgi. this is all permitted by moores law, limited by the amount of heat they (the theoretical consoles) can produce. if we use the orginal ps3 and 360 models as the high watermark for heat, then there is a ~200w limit. presuming that they start on a 22nm, 20nm, or even 16nm process (if launched in 2013 or 2014) then they could potentially have 10x power of the wii u. if they launch any later then it'll just go up. think the current gen against the wii. "equal or slightly more powerful" - it won't even be a contest; it'll be a bloodbath.
tmten on 14 Jun '11 said:
@ Darkwun
you have little idea of what you're talking about. answer me one question - why is a 400% increase (in processing power) for ps4 over ps3 not possible, either financially or technologically?
i appreciate that publishers and developers without sufficient talent or a $50m budget may struggle to compete, but this won't stop progress. think hollywood.
starvinbull on 15 Jun '11 said:
The Wii U will be expensive for us and cheap for Nintendo, just the same as the 3DS.
aj101 on 15 Jun '11 said:
Don't agree. When was the last time consoles featured bleeding edge technology? When was the last time any console was released that wasn't dated the day it was released?
It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out. I don't pretend to know and will not make any predictions on the way things are going to go because look at this generation - who would've picked the Wii spanking everyone else, and this in spite of its s**te hardware.
If devs are interested and excited then sweet. That's about all we've got to go on right now and even that is mostly rumour and speculation.
cooloneuk on 15 Jun '11 said:
Does it really matter if it's 50% more powerful or just as powerful as the Xbox360 and PS3? Although MS and Sony have reduced the size of their consoles quite well, I am surprised that Nintendo have managed to cram it all into a box the same size as the old Wii (3 dvd cases).
I'm not fussed about what's inside it's guts, I wanna know how they're gonna use it!
Balladeer on 15 Jun '11 said:
I've got nothing to say about the rest of your post, as I've never played SotC and you could well be right (although you leave out the puzzle-solving, and crucially SotC has very little dialogue), but "retro platformer"? What makes a modern one then? Arguably the platform genre hasn't really evolved at all, still relying on pixel-perfect jumps as it does, but in that case there's no point in making the distinction.
Of course, you could be referring to SM64's more liberal structure (get the stars in any order you want), in which case I'd have to agree. I'm still hoping for a new SM64. But then no platformer is going to lead the way like SM64 did, and if you ask many people they'll say that SMG came damn close.
Darkwun on 15 Jun '11 said:
strange, then you're saying game developers dont know what theyre talking about as the same speech i just said has been repeated from developers themselves, so doubt me, ur entitled to ur opinion... but doubting countless games developers... high horse... u... get off
50 million budget? u kidding right? look into how much mgs4 cost to make... fifty million is way off. and they had to sell a crap load before they made a profit... and thats KONAMI. movies arent games my friend, thats why we have given them different names, as to not confuse the masses
i know its hard, theyre both media... and some people may indeed try and plug their dual shocks into their daily telegraph, discombobulated with the lack of intergration, but i digress... please come at me with a decent argument before challenging the words of the public outcry of the international gaming development community, it wastes my valuable paint drying watching time. k thx 
Darkwun on 15 Jun '11 said:
and its unlikely/implausible/potentially devastating to the gaming economy... not impossible. i dont rule anything out, as microsoft and sony could well offer incentives for companies to do just this. what this would mean is much fewer games, longer development times, smaller companies going out of business (have u even noticed how many large companies have gone bankrupt in the past decade?) and even less exclusives (the current trend off less exclusives is largely part to development costs not meeting the parameters of a single console user base).
heres something from a google search, i just picked the first pne i could find, and havent even read it properly i just skim read and noticed the date (2007) where the budgets were significantly cheaper than they are now and STILL a worry. also worth noting that it mentions blitz in my local leamington... where i had friends that worked... who now work for codemasters; also down the road, where the same worries are repeated (despite the fact my friends openly admit theyre putting out unfinished games and then releasing the patches later on to cut development time). so yes, in fact i know more than i let on, and for even more reasons than ive just said. so please, have a glazing of pipe down with ur humble pie and basque in my glory
or do my dishes... whichever 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7151961.stm
Balladeer on 15 Jun '11 said:
Darkwun, stop being a smug prat.
Darkwun on 15 Jun '11 said:
im not. im actually being a cocky t**t but thanks for the observation lol
to be smug would be to imply that i have something emotionally to gain from my post, i do not... if someone tries to put me in my place am i not therefore entitled to defend my position? everything i say is in good humour and can take banter as much as i dish it... if people cant handle a hit to their ego when they try and call me out, then dont respond and ill go quietly back into my corner and play with my crayons. ull notice a stark difference in my first post and then my replies... i like a challenging debate with a baiting undertone sue me
boskersrevenge on 15 Jun '11 said:
Shame you're not so fond of spelling, punctuation, grammar and capital letters as well as being so achingly correct
Balladeer on 15 Jun '11 said:
Call it what you want - just make sure that the people you dish it out to take it as well as you. Otherwise you might start a fight and we don't want that, do we?
Darkwun on 15 Jun '11 said:
i didnt realise this was a grammar test lol currently battling reapers while casting my attention to the forums sporadically, this is the net! if i really felt the need to apply my writing skills i'd apply for a job at cvg
as it were, i just dont feel the need to korrekt mai spelin as it duz get da point akroz yagetme 
seriously though, i do not mean to offend-but for this i cannot apologize for... im not a journalist for the site, i have no alliegancies to cvg and so i do not feel the need to hold back on the guttermouth when i post... its the net, people can cast dispersions on someone based on perceptions of words, but character cannot be purveyed in text. 90% of the time i wnt cut someone down THAT bad, but if im backed into a corner, sure, ill dive right in!
if anyone in this thread knew me personally, i would have friends bantering back with me with equal crap. as it stands, people will get offended and complain, or they will take the p**s back... i prefer the latter! if u want to get psychological (u dont, but ill do it anyway lol) i add the p**s takings as i dont like to simply correct people as it comes off as condescending. so does the p**s taking if not taken as intended, but i cant be held accountable for how i come accross, only for what i put forward as the nature of my character.
*yawn*
isnt this a gaming site? BOY has this gone off topic! since when is being astute a bad thing? this is a gaming forum... people who put out wrong facts get cut down, so why is it if im correct to a T i get cut down for that too? :s
Darkwun on 15 Jun '11 said:
agreed, that IS my bad... im not so good at telling the jokers from the... erm.. not jokers? forums are a bit of a minefield for me, but sometimes i cant help myself... like charlie sheen in a strip bar-something just takes over!
boskersrevenge on 15 Jun '11 said:
Don't sweat it, mate. The trick to forums is to take almost everything with a pinch of salt... you don't want to become one of the poor souls who take it all too seriously
tmten on 15 Jun '11 said:
@Darkwun
what a bizarre, convoluted and ranty non-answer to my question. i really don't know where to start. hmm. "you're saying game developers dont know what theyre talking about" no i didn't. "movies arent games my friend, thats why we have given them different names" no s**t. you entirely failed to grasp my point. "its unlikely/implausible/potentially devastating to the gaming economy" huh? unlikely and implausible are mutually exclusive, and potentially devastating is overstating it somewhat. "i know more than i let on" this is the crux. what do you know about semiconductor process tech? two of your initial statements - "for those talking of next generation (ps4/720) being several times more powerful than this gen and pffering real type visuals, you have little understanding of the cpnsole market." and - "expecting a 400% increase on the ps3's power is ridiculous. " both are false, as not only do you not know who's reading them, voiding the first, but you also fail to argue adequately from a technical viewpoint the second. "everything i say is in good humour" same here. one must have, as joseph heller would almost have it, a thousand points of light. especially when posting on the web. although being drunk helps...
Balladeer on 15 Jun '11 said:
Yep, sounds like it's banter on both sides. Carry on...
Jakey Bee on 15 Jun '11 said:
What upsets me most is that it says "UP TO" 50%. I want the Wii U to be twice as powerful, not half.
And why wasn't the Wii U called the Wii Revolution, or Wii R? Does that not sound better than hugga WEEYOOO WEEYOOO!
ShadowAviation on 16 Jun '11 said:
Ah, finally I can shut my Microsft heathen brother up. No more speeches preaching bloody xbox power. Still, Ninty are keeping surprisingly shtum about this. Makes you wonder what else is under the mystery-o-console's hood.
julioaragon on 16 Jun '11 said:
personally the wii is a ok console..i particularly not really into it,MOST of there games are for kids..sure they got a couple..but its always mario this mario that..boring..id rather buy a ps3 than get a wii.. ill stick with my 360
Balladeer on 16 Jun '11 said:
Julio, your position is obvious. Nothing you have to say on a Nintendo thread can possibly be of any use. So please stick to Microsoft threads.
Felly117 on 16 Jun '11 said:
If it's not more powerful the current gen whats the point?
InsertMoreCredit on 16 Jun '11 said:
Looking through this thread - and several others as it would happen - I get the distinct impression that the Playstation & Xbox fanboys are a little concerned that the Wii U might actually be rather good...
Rocketman on 16 Jun '11 said:
I'm going to get one because i miss Nintendo.Been on PS3/360 since my old N64 and i gotta say i miss the game play.All that PS3/360 have for me are COD/FPS's,nothing else comes close to Zelda or Mario in terms of sheer enjoyment.The WII just left me cold though so i do hope this is a return to form for Nintendo.
starvinbull on 16 Jun '11 said:
Nobody is using SMG as an inspiration to make platfom games. SMG has added little to the gameplay pallete of platform games, yet M64 reinvented platform games and is one of the most influential games ever made. SMG isn't, though undeniably has much better gameplay.
Balladeer on 16 Jun '11 said:
Why not? Best platform game of the generation, and people aren't basing their games around it? That's just not good business sense.
anytime on 19 Jun '11 said:
I would like to see three different console games running together to see the difference. This could be a nice "stepping stone" in the long wait for a new console.