Developers are saying the Wii U is less powerful than PS3 Xbox 360

[RoMee]

Nintendo already said the Wii U won't be as powerful as the next xbox or PS4, but it seems like it might not even be on par with the current gen PS3.
No one knows for sure so these rumors/speculations might be wrong.
But it's interesting and the article does make a few good points.

"No, it's not up to the same level as the PS3 or the 360," said one developer who's been working with the Wii U. What does that mean? "The graphics are just not as powerful," reiterated the source.

This developer is not alone in their opinion. Another developer at a major company confirmed this point of view. "Yeah, that's true. It doesn't produce graphics as well as the PS3 or the 360," said the source. "There aren't as many shaders, it's not as capable. Sure, some things are better, mostly as a result of it being a more modern design. But overall the Wii U just can't quite keep up.

This part makes the most sense to me.

Nintendo is also hampered in some ways by the tablet controller. Putting something innovative into a new console is pretty much expected, and the tablet controller is Nintendo's big innovation for the Wii U, not raw horsepower. The tablet controller, with its color LCD touchscreen, is not going to be an inexpensive component. This would tend to push the price of the Wii U (which consists of a Wii U console plus a single tablet controller, according to sources) higher; keeping the retail price of the whole package low means cutting back on the capability of the GPU, CPU, RAM and other components in order to keep the price at the desired level.

What do you guys think. Disappointed if true? False rumors?

It doesn't really matter to me, I already promised my son he'll get one on release date. I just hope their launch games don't suck like the 3DS.

Source: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/article...developers-say

[PharaohsVizier]

I would be a little worried too (though I have problems believing it). I don't think it'll be too big an issue at the start, the PS3 is still fairly impressive, and Nintendo can pump out good looking games for a while, but once we get spoiled by the PS4, Xbox or whatever, it may very well limit the lifespan of the console much like the Wii. I look forward to getting the WiiU though, regardless of how it looks, just worried about the longevity.

[RoMee]

I probably won't be using the Wii U much, other than to play mario games with my son.
I've given up on Nintendo when it comes to hardcore games.

[DeltaBurnt]

I probably won't be using the Wii U much, other than to play mario games with my son.
I've given up on Nintendo when it comes to hardcore games.

Please stop using that term, it's what's making the situation worse and makes the gaming community look even more immature. In movies there are no "hardcore" movies; some people may say one movie is more serious than another, but that's because one movie really does have a more serious tone. Movie reviewers don't point out a Pixar/Disney movie and criticize it for being less hardcore compared to Inception. Nintendo produces consoles with plenty of "hardcore" games, but it doesn't have as many copy and paste, dry, FPS games that other gamers have deemed "hardcore".

Anyways, what happened to the whole released GPU specs showing that the WiiU's rumored GPU was to be even more powerful than the next Xbox's? I know it was just a rumor, but it seemed to have some weight to it.

I would be a little worried too (though I have problems believing it). I don't think it'll be too big an issue at the start, the PS3 is still fairly impressive, and Nintendo can pump out good looking games for a while, but once we get spoiled by the PS4, Xbox or whatever, it may very well limit the lifespan of the console much like the Wii. I look forward to getting the WiiU though, regardless of how it looks, just worried about the longevity.

That's a little doubtful. The next gen consoles power will still probably be about 1-2 years behind that of current gen PCs, and PC graphics/power has hit a wall for awhile now. Sure, there's a little more detail added here and there, but things won't be surpassing Crysis's graphics until a breakthrough is made in technology (quantum computers might do this). When the the PS1-PS3 were all coming out we hadn't hit our wall yet when it came to 3D gaming (mostly because 3D gaming was mostly new and immature), which gave way to this idea that every generation there will be new mind blowing graphical capabilities. This just won't be the case this time. They'll still be 1080p, they'll still roughly have the same "generation" of graphics, etc. It's the same thing with 2D graphics. When we made the jump from 2D to 3D, we had mostly taken 2D graphics as far as they would go (though I admit 3D gaming does have much more potential to grow).

Plus, the Wii's/DS's limited graphics let developers focus on gameplay rather than just graphics, which is why I liked them so much more.

[RoMee]

Is this confirmation from Nintendo?
http://www.computerandvideogames.com...on-tech-specs/

Firm doesn't deny reports its new console is less capable than PS3 and Xbox 360

I still think it'll be a little more powerful or at least on par with current gen.


@deltaburnt
You don't have to get mad every time I state my personal preference.
If I hated Nintendo I wouldn't had bought all their consoles.
I join mostly if not only Nintendo forums, The only non-Nintendo forum I join are iso/rom forum.

So let me clarified something.
The Wii is the fist console I bought this gen, but every non mario game (multiplatform) has disappointed me.
Games like NBA 2k12, Madden Dead Rising, FIFA, etc. are awful on the Wii when compared to the other 2 console.
Terrible AI, features stripped, overall experience is watered down.


While I do enjoy games like fatal frame, or fragile, or the calling, those games are rare and in a sea of thousands of shovelware, kiddie and exercise games, they're pretty much non-exsistant especially in the US.
Do Nintendo have Hardcore games? Yes, They just don't have enough of it to satisfy me.

And what I mean by hardcore I mean games like skyrim, batman, assassins creed, GTA, Mortal Kombat, Fallout, Mass effect, portal, etc. It's not always about cod like you keep pointing out.

Movie reviewers don't point out a Pixar/Disney movie and criticize it for being less hardcore compared to Inception

Because people should already know they're seeing a cartoon made for kids, why would a reviewer need to point this out
If this is how you look at it, than why not include the v-tech v motion as a gaming console, or leapfrog's Leapster as a gaming handheld? Since they do the exact same thing as a console or handheld.

I've given up on Nintendo when it comes to hardcore games.

When I say this, I don't mean Nintendo suck because they don't have any hardcore games.
It means they don't have enough for me, not for you, for me, so I give up.
I have a 1TB HDD with more than 450 Wii games, and only about 10 of those are for me, the rest are for my kids and family.

[DeltaBurnt]

You don't have to get mad every time I state my personal preference.
If I hated Nintendo I wouldn't had bought all their consoles.
I join mostly if not only Nintendo forums, The only non-Nintendo forum I join are iso/rom forum.

So let me clarified something.
The Wii is the fist console I bought this gen, but every non mario game (multiplatform) has disappointed me.
Games like NBA 2k12, Madden Dead Rising, FIFA, etc. are awful on the Wii when compared to the other 2 console.
Terrible AI, features stripped, overall experience is watered down.


While I do enjoy games like fatal frame, or fragile, or the calling, those games are rare and in a sea of thousands of shovelware, kiddie and exercise games, they're pretty much non-exsistant especially in the US.
Do Nintendo have Hardcore games? Yes, They just don't have enough of it to satisfy me.

And what I mean by hardcore I mean games like skyrim, batman, assassins creed, GTA, Mortal Kombat, Fallout, Mass effect, portal, etc. It's not always about cod like you keep pointing out.

Because people should already know they're seeing a cartoon made for kids, why would a reviewer need to point this out
If this is how you look at it, than why not include the v-tech v motion as a gaming console, or leapfrog's Leapster as a gaming handheld? Since they do the exact same thing as a console or handheld.


When I say this, I don't mean Nintendo suck because they don't have any hardcore games.
It means they don't have enough for me, not for you, for me, so I give up.
I have a 1TB HDD with more than 450 Wii games, and only about 10 of those are for me, the rest are for my kids and family.

It wasn't an attack at your personal opinion, if you think the Wii is lacking on games of more serious subject matter that's fine; I also agree. It's just the term "hardcore" really isn't applicable in any sense of the word, it has the connotation and denotation of saying that people who play games like Mario or even Kirby's Epic Yarn aren't playing the right games. It seems to imply that games that aren't deemed "hardcore" are making the gaming scene less serious or less saturated with other more "hardcore" games.

Though your comment about the shovelware seems unfair. The Apple's app store probably has more shovelware than the Wii's library. A console and it's library really shouldn't be judged at all by the amounts of shovelware, as the developer of the console doesn't have much control over that. Not exactly saying that you were attacking the Wii based off it's shovelware, just making a point.

Oh and my mom was the one in my household that made the rest of us see a Toy Story 3 :P. Saying Pixar's movies automatically tell people that it's only for kids is like saying anime is only for kids. Up was sad as fuck, I don't care what anyone else says.

[PharaohsVizier]

Its obvouiusly going to be less powerful. Nintendo is full of cheap businessman that don't care about the system, and then they are just going to jack up the price. The 3DS was $250 yet I bet it takes around $50 just to make one. Same goes for other stuff such as , why is the iPod Touch 64GB the same price as the iPad 2? Or why is the iPhone 4S more expensive then the iPad 3 when it should be cheaper to make since its smaller. The radio antenna I bet is around $5.

There's so much wrong in this post, I can't even begin to start dissecting it. Materials aside, you need to pay for machines, labor, distribution, design, etc. Not only does the 3DS cost far more than $50 to create, but it has to cover the profit margins of the entire supply chain. It's not about how big it is, or how many materials you need, it's about the design, the production, etc. It is fortunate that the massive scale of production for things like the iPhone has decreased the amount of money each person has to pay for say the designer, can you imagine how much it'd cost to custom design one of these devices?

Is this confirmation from Nintendo?
http://www.computerandvideogames.com...on-tech-specs/

I really hope not... I don't want to read too much into this, could just be Nintendo being an idiot and stressing their "role" in the market.

So let me clarified something.
The Wii is the fist console I bought this gen, but every non mario game (multiplatform) has disappointed me.
Games like NBA 2k12, Madden Dead Rising, FIFA, etc. are awful on the Wii when compared to the other 2 console.
Terrible AI, features stripped, overall experience is watered down.

I don't really think those are fair comparisons, multiplats really shouldn't be bought or even made on the device to begin with. It isn't a reflection of how terrible the Wii is in my opinion, rather a poor reflection of game developers that are willing to put subpar games on the shelves. The Wii was put on shelves weaker for a very deliberate reason, to provide a lower spec console for an affordable price. At the time the Wii came out, I didn't have an HDTV, and the price tag of the PS3 was a bit of an issue. This many years down the line, it's easy to say in hindsight that the console aged poorly and that the decision wasn't the best, but you have to point out the obvious bonuses that came with the Wii early on in the game, whether it is price, innovation or whatever.

While I do enjoy games like fatal frame, or fragile, or the calling, those games are rare and in a sea of thousands of shovelware, kiddie and exercise games, they're pretty much non-exsistant especially in the US.

I don't usually get the chance to play all the games on a certain console. For me, all a console has to do is have a handful of GREAT games to stand out. Albeit the Wii hasn't provided something as memorable as say Ocarina of Time, but again for me a handful of games is all that's needed to satisfy me. When I had the NES or SNES, I probably had 10 cartridges tops, and maybe about 5 or 6 of them kept me busy for years and years. I currently use my PS3 a lot more than my Wii, and frankly it's based on maybe 2 or 3 games that I play a lot of rather than the "library" of the console.

It wasn't an attack at your personal opinion, if you think the Wii is lacking on games of more serious subject matter that's fine; I also agree. It's just the term "hardcore" really isn't applicable in any sense of the word, it has the connotation and denotation of saying that people who play games like Mario or even Kirby's Epic Yarn aren't playing the right games. It seems to imply that games that aren't deemed "hardcore" are making the gaming scene less serious or less saturated with other more "hardcore" games.

I think even Nintendo used terms like core gamers and stuff. I think the term is pretty accurate. Someone who picks up the usual "hardcore" games are "hardcore" gamers. A kid who plays COD probably plays hours and hours of that before logging in on WoW. I guess the better way to put this is, generally people who play "hardcore" games describe themselves as gamers to a certain degree. People who play Mario CAN be hardcore gamers, but there are a fair amount of casual players of Mario games. I don't look down on Mario games or anything, but it speaks for itself, Nintendo has aimed at the casual crowd, and they are getting exactly what they wanted, an image of families playing video games together. Is there anything wrong with that? Yes and no I guess, it's a bit of a tradeoff, one that Nintendo was glad to make when they got oodles and oodles of money.

[DeltaBurnt]

I think even Nintendo used terms like core gamers and stuff. I think the term is pretty accurate. Someone who picks up the usual "hardcore" games are "hardcore" gamers. A kid who plays COD probably plays hours and hours of that before logging in on WoW. I guess the better way to put this is, generally people who play "hardcore" games describe themselves as gamers to a certain degree. People who play Mario CAN be hardcore gamers, but there are a fair amount of casual players of Mario games. I don't look down on Mario games or anything, but it speaks for itself, Nintendo has aimed at the casual crowd, and they are getting exactly what they wanted, an image of families playing video games together. Is there anything wrong with that? Yes and no I guess, it's a bit of a tradeoff, one that Nintendo was glad to make when they got oodles and oodles of money.

I can accept the usage of the word hardcore to say "someone who plays games for hours on end", but it most definitely can't be used to classify the games/consoles someone plays on. Also, I'm pretty sure Nintendo only started using the term "core" gamers to try and garner attention for some of their releases like Madworld, and not because they truly believe it's something that exists. Basically they were using it as an advertising ploy to try and get some new customers.

Also, a ton of people are calling bullshit on this. I'll leave this video here that does side by side comparisons between the confirmed specs of the WiiU and that of the PS3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcnsG11MRE8

In a shortened text form that I found on reddit: "Wii U is using R700 series chipset, which is what Radeon 4800 is based on, which has very similar (if not faster) performance to a Radeon 6670, which got rebranded this year as 7670, which is the rumored candidate chipset for motherfucking Playstation 4."

[Jakob15]

Its obvouiusly going to be less powerful. Nintendo is full of cheap businessman that don't care about the system, and then they are just going to jack up the price. The 3DS was $250 yet I bet it takes around $50 just to make one. Same goes for other stuff such as , why is the iPod Touch 64GB the same price as the iPad 2? Or why is the iPhone 4S more expensive then the iPad 3 when it should be cheaper to make since its smaller. The radio antenna I bet is around $5.