TIME: 'Why the Wii U Isn’t the Dinosaur Some Are Making It Out to Be'

[garyopa]

'The somewhat sullen attitude that the Wii U is just the Wii all over again'



TIME Techland made an interesting article about some of the criticisms based on what we know about the Wii U...

After the disappointing Nintendo E3 press conference this year, and the numerous Wii U 'issues' and more as reported by the media, TIME Techland decided to run an article examining some of the Wii U key features.

They say that the "sullen attitude" from traditional gamers that the Wii U is just the Wii all over again and the dismissive assumption that Microsoft and Sony next-gen consoles will blow the doors off Nintendo’s system, are erroneous as we’re at a point in game hardware design where what’s under the hood matters less than at any point before.

So, they ran an analysis and exposed some criticisms based on what we know about the Wii U:

- Processor and Graphics.

Even if, as some have said, the Wii U is only “as powerful” or “slightly more powerful than” current-gen systems, I don’t see the problem. I never hear anyone complain that iPad games don’t look as good as PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360 ones, for instance, or that PC games — now crunched by more than half-a-decade more powerful hardware than either the Xbox 360 or PS3 — are in any way superior because their visuals are more advanced.

I think the same will apply to Wii U games when compared to whatever Microsoft and Sony have up their sleeves, graphically speaking. It’s a point I’ve raised before about contemporary visuals in games: We’re far past the point of abstraction-by-limitation, and games that want to simulate reality do such a good job of it on today’s systems that fussing over photorealism is a core crowd fetish, still stuck in the “mine’s bigger than yours” mindset.

- Storage.

But let’s talk about a design choice Nintendo made that really does seem odd on its face: the Wii U’s marginal internal storage.

Nintendo’s Wii U? A fractional 8GB of flash storage. Isn’t that a problem?

It would be, if the Wii U didn’t support storage upgrades, much as Microsoft did with its original no-hard-drive Xbox 360 or currently does with its entry-level 4GB model. Word is Nintendo will allow you to grow the Wii U’s storage via flash memory sticks or external hard drives via USB (the system has four USB ports). As a functional sticking point, therefore, it isn’t one.

- The GamePad.

It’s definitely not your garden-variety gamepad, and it’s anyone’s guess whether it’ll be the go-to controller when it comes to this game or that one. But here’s the thing gamers balking at the controller don’t seem to understand: Nintendo is offering more controller possibilities than any console-maker in history.

As my colleague Harry McCracken notes, the Wii U GamePad can be “a Wiimote with a touchscreen,” “a second screen which may or may not mirror what’s being shown on the TV,” “a complement to the Wiimote,” “a tethered gaming handheld,” “a window into a virtual world,” “a social-networking device” and “a fancy universal remote.”

And that’s just the GamePad itself. Nintendo’s going to support all of the older Wii peripherals, as well as something new it’s calling the Wii U Pro Controller. If you’re a core gamer balking at the size of the Wii U GamePad, therefore, stop fretting — Nintendo has you covered.

According to them Nintendo’s trying to enliven the home gaming experience with a two-screen angle, not trying to subvert the iPad.

This is about melding the Wii and DS experience, not doing a me-too tablet. Nintendo knows iPads make terrible game controllers when it comes to games that require fine motor input and precise control. And the impact of the tablet market’s growth on what Nintendo’s hoping to achieve with the Wii U will be next to zero.

If Apple ever gets serious about console-style gaming — and according to recent comments from Apple CEO Tim Cook, it has no plans to — then we’ll see, but at present, I detect nothing about Nintendo’s approach that feels anything but forward-looking.

And finally, he concludes that the wave-off accusations that the company is just “pulling another Wii” are "missing some pretty obvious and salient points".

What do you think? Are we overreacting? Only time will tell...

Also, don't forget to check out the full article below!

NEWS SOURCE: Why the Wii-U isn't the dinosaur some are making it out to be (via) TIME TechLand

Our thanks to 'Gauss' for this news item!

[Battlefield]

"we’re at a point in game hardware design where what’s under the hood matters less than at any point before."

Thats so true.

Gameplay doesent improve on the best of the best GFX games on PC, because it doesent impress me much more than the good looking games like Dante's Inferno on PS3, Uncharted, Forza 4, Gears of War 3 etc.

GFX have kinda halted for years already. What we need now is innovation and games which isnt boring after 1 playthrough. Many games is so boring that you dont even finish it once.

[tech3475]

I do agree that until we see the competition it's pointless speculating such as the wii only rendering 720p which is nothing if the xbox 720 only renders at said resolution.

Storage however is still an issue, people may think it's just a download issue but it can be used to store other things such as caching, which devs can't rely on in the Wii U's current state. If the xbox 720 comes with a HDD by default then it may inhibit future games unless there is a universal acceptance for additional storage.

[Ahmed_p800]

I never hear anyone complain that iPad games don’t look as good as PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360

People are STILL comparing iPads to consoles?!!! facepalm, facepalm, facepalm!

[Battlefield]

I do agree that until we see the competition it's pointless speculating such as the wii only rendering 720p which is nothing if the xbox 720 only renders at said resolution.

Storage however is still an issue, people may think it's just a download issue but it can be used to store other things such as caching, which devs can't rely on in the Wii U's current state. If the xbox 720 comes with a HDD by default then it may inhibit future games unless there is a universal acceptance for additional storage.

Atleast Flash Drives and External HD's is damn cheap these days.

The Wii-U pad is an expensive controller, and the addition of a HD would increase the console price by a bit.

The price of a 500.GB and 2.TB is not much different these days. The reason is that the space addition dont cost much, but the piece of hardware is the same.
Wii-U also have SD slot, and SD cards is also damn cheap now.

If you can connect a 2.TB external HD to Wii-U, it would be much better than the limit of PS3 and 360.

I have 320.GB in my Xbox 360 which is max, and i have 750.GB in my PS3. PS3 can atleast support 1.TB internally.

[tech3475]

Atleast Flash Drives and External HD's is damn cheap these days.

The Wii-U pad is an expensive controller, and the addition of a HD would increase the console price by a bit.

You are right, but as I said, my problem is more in the dev department.

Of course, this is ignoring any potential speed loss caused by e.g. using USB 2 instead of SATA.

Thinking about it, Nintendo could be making allot more of the Wii U if they expect you to upgrade, for example making it like the Ps3 with an optional TV tuner, media playback, etc.

Hackers have allot of potential to work with.

[Battlefield]

You are right, but as I said, my problem is more in the dev department.

Of course, this is ignoring any potential speed loss caused by e.g. using USB 2 instead of SATA.

Thinking about it, Nintendo could be making allot more of the Wii U if they expect you to upgrade, for example making it like the Ps3 with an optional TV tuner, media playback, etc.

Hackers have allot of potential to work with.

Even Wii have USB 2.0, but 2.0 isnt that bad.

USB 3.0 way faster, but isnt much better practically because the bottleneck is the speed of HD's themselves among other things.

A fast HD may only utilize like 10% of what USB 3.0 can handle. I'm just guessing here.. Physical HD's is too slow for fast interfaces. You need something better than SSD to utilize it. That do cost way too much for most people. USB 2.0 is sufficent for the old motorized HD's i think. I think SCSI HD's can run faster, but SCSI is not mainstream anymore like it was 10-20 years ago.

As for hacking.. I think they can do alot of cool stuff with Wii-U.. Just look at everything hackers did with Wii. With Wii tablet, it can only be cooler.

[tech3475]

Even Wii have USB 2.0, but 2.0 isnt that bad.

USB 3.0 way faster, but isnt much better practically because the bottleneck is the speed of HD's themselves among other things.

A fast HD may only utilize like 10% of what USB 3.0 can handle. I'm just guessing here.. Physical HD's is too slow for fast interfaces. You need something better than SSD to utilize it. That do cost way too much for most people. USB 2.0 is sufficent for the old motorized HD's i think. I think SCSI HD's can run faster, but SCSI is not mainstream anymore like it was 10-20 years ago.

As for hacking.. I think they can do alot of cool stuff with Wii-U.. Just look at everything hackers did with Wii. With Wii tablet, it can only be cooler.

Again you're right, the only reason I said possible is because it MAY cause issues depending on what's happening (relax I'm not asking for benchmarks) like if you were loading a game off the HDD and trying to cache at the same time which was similar to supposed issues with Halo 3 which was over SATA on a 5400RPM drive.

It's nothing overall but as I said the main issue with the storage choice is where devs can't (or are forced not to) assume that you have spare storage and it could inhibit future development.

[Battlefield]

Again you're right, the only reason I said possible is because it MAY cause issues depending on what's happening (relax I'm not asking for benchmarks) like if you were loading a game off the HDD and trying to cache at the same time which was similar to supposed issues with Halo 3 which was over SATA on a 5400RPM drive.

It's nothing overall but as I said the main issue with the storage choice is where devs can't (or are forced not to) assume that you have spare storage and it could inhibit future development.

I agree with that, but devs only need this if they lack programming skills.

Killzone 3 is very heavy on GFX etc, and it can still stream from a slow blu-ray disc. HD cache is not needed if the dev know what they are doing.
Many of the GFX heavy games on 360 also loads fast from disc, but that drive is faster than the Blu-Ray player on PS3 thou.

Several PS3 games loads slower with HD cache, than the same game running from DVD on a 360.

I know this, because i have a few dupe games on both consoles.

[LKJHGFDSA]

I disagree with all of it. The graphics from the E3 previews seem to be WAY sub par of current gen consoles. Graphics do matter when they're THAT poor. (if it were only slightly better than current consoles, that wouldn't be too bad)
Nintendo are the ones who said it'd be powerful, with the graphical demonstrations at the E3 last year. I'm not the one saying “mine’s bigger than yours”, Nintendo did.

The storage, okay it's upgradable, to what though? 64GB? Really?
Compared to the PS3 that's nothing at all.
Considering the advances in digital distribution, and the fact that Ninty said we'll be able to buy most games digitally calls for higher storage capabilities IMO.
Ah wait, USB HDDs? (overread that part) Well I can't see that happening tbh. No way.

The gamepad, I have some faith in. As long as games actually use it properly!! Unlike games have done so with the 3DS's features.
and I consider the gamepad pro to be a massive downside, not an upside. It shows that Nintendo don't care if the standard gamepad can't be used well for 'hardcore' games.


Sorry for sounding so negative.
Also, what's the deal with this post? It seems to have only been written from first impressions on the Wii U. Stuff from over a year a go.
In reality it should be about the poor software line up, and the online features. Since those are the things in current discussion.

and honestly I wouldn't say they're “pulling another Wii” but they're pulling another 3DS! Gimmicky features, no good games, no appeal to serious gamers, etc.

You are right, but as I said, my problem is more in the dev department.

Of course, this is ignoring any potential speed loss caused by e.g. using USB 2 instead of SATA.

Thinking about it, Nintendo could be making allot more of the Wii U if they expect you to upgrade, for example making it like the Ps3 with an optional TV tuner, media playback, etc.

Hackers have allot of potential to work with.

LOL you're getting into too much detail over a theoretical situation. "IT HAS USB PORTS SO HACKERS CAN DO STUFF WITH IT LULULUL HURR DERPITY DURRR"

[JonathanD]

I do agree that until we see the competition it's pointless speculating such as the wii only rendering 720p which is nothing if the xbox 720 only renders at said resolution.

Storage however is still an issue, people may think it's just a download issue but it can be used to store other things such as caching, which devs can't rely on in the Wii U's current state. If the xbox 720 comes with a HDD by default then it may inhibit future games unless there is a universal acceptance for additional storage.

You talk about cache from the disk, I was wondering what speed of drive the Wii-U will have if its fast enough there would be a lot less need to cache anything.

One thing that will ease the whole cache issue is having enough RAM on the system. The issue on the PS3 and a lesser extent the 360 (due to its configuration.) was that they had so little RAM in them to work with so using the hard drive as cache or a swap file was almost required.

[tech3475]

You talk about cache from the disk, I was wondering what speed of drive the Wii-U will have if its fast enough there would be a lot less need to cache anything.

One thing that will ease the whole cache issue is having enough RAM on the system. The issue on the PS3 and a lesser extent the 360 (due to its configuration.) was that they had so little RAM in them to work with so using the hard drive as cache or a swap file was almost required.

I'm thinking more long term, after all what may be fine now may not be so later. Plus with Nintendo now trying to get more "core" games on the system I'm think about multi-platform games and how they are on the other platforms.

It's one of those things, it obviously is possible to get away with not have anything above the bare minimum for storing saves but I wonder what could be.

LOL you're getting into too much detail over a theoretical situation. "IT HAS USB PORTS SO HACKERS CAN DO STUFF WITH IT LULULUL HURR DERPITY DURRR"

I honestly never intended this to go on as long as it did, my bit on storage was meant to be a throwaway thing.

The bit about what Nintendo could do was a digression on my part which came about after thinking that if they expect people to expand it anyway then why not go the full hog? Then it progressed further to hackers because they can come up with stuff which never sees the light of day such as making the Xbox 1 a good media centre, SBSettings on the iphone, etc. and as the guy at CC says Hacking or linux is inevitable.

Plus, if you want me to be a smartarse remember that the USB port is how you hack a PS3 if you are on <=3.55 (albeit thanks to a leaked dongle and badly implemented security).

[Signa]

The only part I disagree with is the graphics section. I'm not some graphics whore that needs my games to look sweet, but it is what held the Wii back from the hard-core audience last time. I'm not even speaking for the consumers here, but for the developers. UE4 just got showcased, and you can bet your ass that if the next-gen systems can run it, and the Wii U can't, then we are just going to see a repeat of this console generation all over again. Devs are going to need the WiiU to be powerful enough to run the game that they want to make for the multiplatform releases. If a game isn't multiplatform, it's probably not going to make enough money to get made, so WiiU exclusives are just out.

[IJTF_Cinder]

The whole cache thing is a totally nullifiable argument...has anyone in here NOT paid attention to the kind of RAM Nintendo has been utilizing in it's consoles the last 2 gens? 1T and 2T SRAM make the stuff used in the PS3/360 look like Turtles carrying the data!

The use of a "cache" is irrelevant with regards to a processing perspective anyway, used on the other systems it was a temporary storage space for data off the discs...the term being something completely different than an actual "cache" for the underlying hardware.

Nintendo has one thing going for them the other two don't...***** all you want, they never LIE to you about their stuff, quoting non real-world numbers on paper, and making promises of resolutions/features their hardware cannot deliver.

[JonathanD]

The whole cache thing is a totally nullifiable argument...has anyone in here NOT paid attention to the kind of RAM Nintendo has been utilizing in it's consoles the last 2 gens? 1T and 2T SRAM make the stuff used in the PS3/360 look like Turtles carrying the data!

The use of a "cache" is irrelevant with regards to a processing perspective anyway, used on the other systems it was a temporary storage space for data off the discs...the term being something completely different than an actual "cache" for the underlying hardware.

Nintendo has one thing going for them the other two don't...***** all you want, they never LIE to you about their stuff, quoting non real-world numbers on paper, and making promises of resolutions/features their hardware cannot deliver.

I understood what he meant by using the hard drive as cache, it was more pronounced on the PS3 since the BD drive was something like half the speed even of the 360's DVD drive in terms of raw transfer speed. So streaming stuff from the disk in order to ease the low RAM situation was made more problematic. Cache can mean so many things in computers its not even funny although it seems to fit better in this situation than buffer, but the word buffer might be more accurate?

I totally agree about Nintendo not promising things they do not deliver on, out of the three they are the best in that aspect. Microsoft is probably a close second if you ignore the whole RROD issue (No they never promised a reliable system but that shouldn't need to be promised... lol) Sony on the other hand this generation has been the epitome of what I would call false advertising, they promised the world and delivered less as time went on.... Thats ass backwards, firmware updates should fix things or add features... not remove them! I'm not just talking about Other OS either, if you liked to rip your own movies you had to watch what format you used after some updates or risk having to re rip your entire collection due to Cinavia being "added".