PS3 News: Naughty Dog Dev On Wii U: "I'm Not Completely Sold" - PS3 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

Naughty Dog Dev On Wii U: "I'm Not Completely Sold"

Come on. It must've been a coincidence that Nintendo's stock dropped after unveiling the Wii U at E3.

While we certainly remain skeptical, a great many Wii fans are excited. Aren't they? Developers and analysts have been weighing in as well, although most are reserved in their comments. Take Naughty Dog game director Justin Richmond, for example, who told NowGamer that he isn't "completely sold" on Nintendo's new console yet. That being said, he wasn't sold on the original Wii, either, and "look how that did." Added Richmond:

"To be honest with you, the idea of it is very, very cool. But there's nothing that the Wii U has that the Vita and PS3 doesn't. You know, it's an interesting piece of technology, and I'm interested to see how people use it."

He went on to say the Wii U has some "very strange holes in it" and the screen not being multi-touch is a "little weird." But even so, he's convinced that games made for the system could be amazing; after all, Nintendo has always fared well with their first-party gems. Personally, I couldn't possibly care less but Nintendo had me at hello. ...love my SNES.

Tags: naughty dog, wii u, playstation vita, ps3

7/14/2011 10:45:54 AM Ben Dutka

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (105 posts)

bigrailer19
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:08:13 AM
Reply

I'm not sold on it either. Think it's got very cool features and technology but I had my reservations bout the wii also despite how well it was doing. So I folded,, bought one and it never got used... The Mario games were all I actually enjoyed on the thing, especially new super Mario bros. But it wasn't because it was on the wii, it was because it was Mario, I felt like I did when I was a kid playing them. To me that's all nintendo has going for them and it's a strong following. The systems themselves well, let's just say in my opinion they are lucky they have those awesome titles.

Agree with this comment 8 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:44:08 PM

I agree, Mario games are probably the only ones I'm interested in playing. I'll leave Nintendo for my 2nd cousins until I visit them.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Qubex
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 8:57:49 PM

I am going to give them a chance this time around and see if they do well with this concept or not. I won't be investing in this kit personally, but I will definitely track it as an interest to see if Nintendo are really that innovative; i.e. what ever they put their mind too ends up making money.

Before I judge them completely, I give them a chance to see what they do with it and how developers and the public react to the kit upon release.

As we all agree though, it is ALL ABOUT THE GAMES!

Q!

"play.experience.enjoy"

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mornelithe
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 1:37:51 AM

Durnit, posted in the wrong place!




Last edited by Mornelithe on 7/15/2011 1:39:00 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:11:12 AM
Reply

Nintendo is turning into the Apple of the videogame biz

Last edited by Cesar_ser_4 on 7/14/2011 11:12:08 AM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 9 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:27:53 AM

How so?

Agree with this comment 8 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:52:42 AM

If you gotta ask, you can't know...

Agree with this comment 3 up, 9 down Disagree with this comment

BTNwarrior
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:56:29 AM

making products that look cool and sell well yet are not really useful or fun

Agree with this comment 8 up, 5 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:25:17 PM

@Ceaser, way to dodge the question there champ. I think you have no clue what you're talking about. You just wanted to bash Nintendo and Apple in one fell swoop.

@BTN, umm....I find my iMac and iPhone quite useful for work and play. I'm typing this comment from my iPhone...see useful. Oh, I just got an email from a customer, to which I shall reply...again from my iPhone. Useful.

Agree with this comment 16 up, 5 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:00:20 PM

owned

Agree with this comment 12 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

kevinater321
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:11:04 PM

Maybe he means overpriced tech that is over hyped.

Agree with this comment 9 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Kiryu
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:38:02 PM

r u saying that because of the color of their hardware?

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:39:56 PM

@Kevin, Yea that must be it, especially since Nintendo charged $500 for the 3DS and $1000 for the Wii...oh wait...



Last edited by Jawknee on 7/14/2011 1:40:20 PM

Agree with this comment 7 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

kevinater321
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 2:05:49 PM

Well they could easily sell there hardware for less. The ds is still $200. And yes the wii was overpriced when it was released considering the tech.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 2:19:06 PM

Umm...no it's not.

http://www.amazon.ca/Nintendo-045496718763-DSi-Matte-Blue/dp/B001T8S62Q/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1310671046&sr=8-3

And if the Wii was over priced when it launched so was the PS2. C'mon Kevin. You're grasping for straws and you're missing every attempt.

Last edited by Jawknee on 7/14/2011 2:20:35 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

SoulController
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 2:22:36 PM

LOL

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

tes37
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 2:55:47 PM

An apple computer is way better than a pc when it's used like it's meant to be used. Anything artistic such as music composition, graphic arts, video, etc., the Mac excels at it. When it comes to office work only, you might as well go the cheaper route and get a pc.

Last edited by tes37 on 7/14/2011 2:56:50 PM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mornelithe
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 3:09:26 PM

@ Jawknee: User preference aside, which is honestly more of a driving point than actual value for dollar (unfortunately). He's correct. Apple products are extremely overpriced for what they deliver, and the Wii was overpriced from launch, continues to be overpriced, and as long as people still keep buying them, will likely remain to be overpriced for the duration.

Again, I'm not touching your personal preference, because...that's your choice. But, the intentionally provocative comments aside, they are overpriced.

@ Tes: Correct, however, the problem is, for the price of what they charge for a Mac, you can build an Windows based PC, that far exceeds the specs of a Mac. The other major difference is software support. Windows has it in droves, Mac doesn't. That doesn't mean there isn't support for all software, just...not as much as for Windows based machines.

It's like buying an alienware PC, versus, building one on your own. You end up with pretty much the same cost/value discrepancy.

Last edited by Mornelithe on 7/14/2011 3:12:01 PM

Agree with this comment 7 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

tes37
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 3:32:56 PM

I believe there to be a greater value with the Mac. Straight out of the box, with a couple hundred dollar price difference, you get better performance. To some people, performance may not be an issue, but it's noticeable to me and I prefer Macintosh.

When it comes to building your own pc, at least you know what your getting and not relying on exaggerated specs.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 3:38:08 PM

$150 for a Wii is over priced? Sorry, I just don't agree. As for Apple, yea their stuff is expensive but its quality built hardware and the iMac I bought for my wife for work, over 3 years now is still running like new and I only paid a little over 2k for it. It was the largest screen they were offering at the time. the max amount of memory and a 1T drive. I just bought a new iPhone 4. $199.99 with a new contract which is worth it in my opinion, again because its a tough, quality piece of hardware.

Besides, I never argued Apple stuff wasn't expensive. Only that Nintendo hardware is not. They cannot be compared. I have never paid more than a few hundred dollars for anything Nintendo.

@Indeed Tes. I bought a Vaio which is also a nice piece of hardware but the software performance(Windows 7) is no where near as good as Mac OS on our iMac.

Last edited by Jawknee on 7/14/2011 3:47:01 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 4:02:23 PM

Come on Jawknee, don't try to make me seem like an ignorant xbot when I'm not. The reason i typed it was because it really does seem like nintendo is following apple's footsteps because they release products that lack features but still sale like crazy. Then, they release the next device. with more features but still somewhat lacking. but those millions that bought the wii or the original ds and nothing else will see it as the next great thing, and if nintendo is really turning into apple, will sell like crazy again. I didn't post it to bash either company.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 4:43:32 PM

"don't try to make me seem like an ignorant xbot when I'm not."

Are you mad?

I never implied you were an ignorant Xbot. Only that your comment was ignorant in general. I'm still not entirely sure what you're talking about as neither Apple OR Nintendo do what you claim they do.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Mornelithe
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 5:13:51 PM

Unfortunately, my Father (Systems Administrator for a University) and a co-worker from a previous IT firm would disagree with you. Apple uses substandard internals, poorly made, and quite cheap. His co-worker deconstructed a Mac, and found that the internals were underclocked and from companies prone to poor manufacturing. What that means is they can take something that was poorly manufactured, but keep it from performing at it's peak, in order to lengthen it's lifespan...however, it will eventually succumb to the poor manufacturing problems.

Again, this is simply what builds a Mac, and is no slant on your preferences. You can buy them to your hearts content, but it doesn't negate the fact that Mac's are overpriced and under-performing for that price premium.

What you're in fact paying for, is really a shiny box. As I said, like an alienware desktop. Glitz and glamour, and little else.

@ Tes: We're not talking a few hundred dollars difference, we're talking 500-1000 dollars difference. It is, in fact, quite a large markup for what you're actually getting in return.

And yes, building your own PC is by far, the best way to approach it. Yes, I understand not everyone wants to take the time...but really, given that it takes a couple hours with instructions, or an hour tops if you're experienced...that really is no excuse in my opinion. But, as I said, it's all about preference, real facts rarely mean anything to anyone these days. No, I don't mean that as a slam, simply, people demand satisfaction immediately, and will pay the price for it, one way or another.

And Jawknee, disagree or don't, but if you break down what makes a Nintendo Wii and add up the price, it isn't $150. To put it in perspective, by 2009, the Wii's production costs had been reduced by roughly %47, so, by 2009 the Wii cost Nintendo ~$132.50 to make. In 2 years, development costs for ages old tech doesn't increase.

Last edited by Mornelithe on 7/14/2011 5:26:22 PM

Agree with this comment 8 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 6:02:08 PM

My experience has been the opposite. I only had issues with my wifes Mac book from about 8 years ago and that didn't start having problems until about 6 or 7 years into its life after heavy use.

I believe you about your father and his findings. I have read your posts here and on other sites and you have never given me a reason not to believe what you say however those things just don't matter to most consumers. Macs serve my purposes greatly and that's what I am paying for. Not just a shiny box.

Also with the Wii, yea you're probably correct that it's not worth $150 when you break it down into to nuts and bolts but that's irrelevant. Nintendo is a business, a business needs to make a profit and in order to make a profit they have to sell what they produce for more than what it costs them to produce it. The Wii is less capable than the PS3 or the Xbox 360 but it's also the cheapest console on the market. $150 for a console that does what's intended to do is not a unfair asking price.

Last edited by Jawknee on 7/14/2011 6:05:47 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

tes37
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:23:04 PM

Are you trying to say that Apple does an incredible job for having such sh*tty components, because you agreed there's better performance from a mac. That can be observed as fact regardless of the quality of the parts.

I think the main difference in the two platforms lies more with code than hardware anyways. If you read the difference between ASCII and Binary code it seems to be in favor of Binary for faster processing because of a lack of error handling written into the code.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mornelithe
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 1:39:16 AM

@ Jawknee: Here's the thing, and honestly, the brilliance in their design. They under clock parts, so that they don't overheat or fail. Thus allowing them to last longer. I didn't say the machines were junk, I simply said the parts were substandard. To be honest, I had friends in the late 90's early 00's with still functioning Mac II's. But, for the price paid for those items, those poor parts, a much more quality machine could've been purchased. You know what I mean? I personally have a problem with that tactic. I think it's underhanded, and I refuse to support it. That's really where my dislike of Apple comes from. And in that regard, looking at it in that view...if the parts aren't worth the premium...what are you paying for? The shiny box. That's what I meant when I said that.

You're right, most consumers don't care. But, I do. And, I really hate seeing people being used without their knowledge. I know, you don't really look at it at that way, and that's ok. I just won't allow myself to be used in that fashion. To be fair though, I won't buy prebuilt PC's Mac or Windows based, anymore. They all have a price premium you pay, Apple simply has a higher premium, and no option of building your own.

As for the Wii, well, look, I'm not trying to deny a company their due profits. But how much is enough? In late 2006, the Wii cost $158.30 to manufacture. By April of 2009, that had been reduced by ~%45. I was off, by the way. Thinking that at launch the Wii probably cost around $250...it didn't. So, by 2009, the Wii cost under $100, around ~$88 to produce. That just doesn't jive with me. Which you could probably guess considering my issues with Apple =)

But, I also realize I'm kinda crazy at times, so I don't blame people for their choices. I really don't. Sometimes I feel compelled to clear the air on certain things, because I simply hate seeing the wrong information being tossed around in discussions. Yeah, it's part of my crazy. Can't stop it. Just see it...and have to say something. It's actually really wierd. hah. But, at least I'm getting better at explaining my position. I've had my moments in the past (lookin at you Highlander), where personal preference gets the better of simply the facts, and takes the entire discussion down the wrong path. So, thanks for talking about it with me. Appreciate the civil discourse.

@ Tes: Erm, no, I didn't say there's better performance from a Mac, I said the parts are underclocked in order to extend the life of substandard parts, bought on the cheap. And yes, it is a very brilliant strategy, as long as people are willing to turn a blind eye to it, or aren't aware. I'm just not willing to do that.

The other problem is, having lived in a house where building PC's is the norm, for as long as I did. I also demand that my PC's be customizable from top to bottom, because that's what I'm used to. Anything less, makes me angry lol. Hell, look at how much I go ape$hit when a game is announced without dedicated servers. If you've not noticed, I'm sure any number of folks here could corroborate that one. Heh. Yes, I'm a strange one ;)

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mornelithe
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 1:49:46 AM

Btw, I know this site isn't about Mac vs PC, or PC vs Console, and sorry to be taking up so much space with this discussion (Mainly talking to you Ben). As I said, sometimes I just can't stop myself from saying something. So, I apologize for everyone having to scroll through my novels to get to the rest of the comments.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 1:34:29 PM

No problem. I enjoy reading your posts and enjoyed the civil exchange. :)

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Simcoe
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 2:22:49 PM

I agree with Mornelithe and Jawknee, many people don't care about build quality, especially in NA, want proof? I give you exhibit A, the Xbox 360.

Also, why make something (example an iPhone) that won't last more than two or three years when people always need to get the latest and greatest phone when their current contract expires. As I see it, why not have it programmed to fail when the contract expires, just gives that person a good excuse to buy the latest version!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 10:01:28 PM

Actually my first generation iPhone still works fine. The only reason I upgraded was because AT&T wouldn't implement my employee discount unless I had a 3G or newer. So...yea, iPhone's last longer than 3 years. My 3G would still be working fine had I not dropped it without it's case. Thus I needed to get a new one because it was broken.

You cannot compare Apple products to the Xbox 360. I have never had to return a piece of Apple hardware 3 months after buying it and Apple's hardware failure rate is well within the normal % of technology hardware failures.

I never said most people don't care about build quality. I said knowing what each component costs and how much the company paid for vs what they are selling it for or how they clock in when being tested is what matters little to people as long as the given piece of hardware serves the intended purpose and people feel they are paying a fair price for what they are getting. I will take Morn's word for it about Apple's tactics but as I said, my experience with Apple products as of the last 15 years has been excellent. Their iMac's serve my wife's work purposes as well as my music editing purposes and serves those purposes little to no trouble.

And don't generalize about NA. If we really didn't care about build quality we wouldn't choose Honda's and Toyota's over GM's and Ford's or Gibson and Fender's over Ibanez and Yamaha, etc.

Last edited by Jawknee on 7/15/2011 10:08:59 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mornelithe
Saturday, July 16, 2011 @ 12:12:20 PM

@ Jawknee: They absolutely serve their purpose dude, definitely agree, I was actually brought up in a situation where my mother was a Mac-head, and my Father a DOS/Windows guy, who did that stuff for a living.

Can you even FATHOM, the fight that I was born into? Oh...my...god. It was even worse than you can imagine, mainly because they divorced when I was 3 months old, and not in the nice we went separate ways, kind of separation lol.

I used to use Mac's constantly at my mom's house, and PC at my dad's...so I'm definitely familiar with the brand. I just never caught the Apple craze like so many people have.

Definitely wasn't until around the time the iphone came out, that I learned as much about Mac's internal makeup as I did. (His IT buddy deconstructed it, so he could buy stock in the companies that supply Mac their internals...that worked well for him).

But, long story short, as long as it suits your purpose that's all that really matters in the end. Although, there's nothing wrong with learning about the competition in the process. =)

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Monday, July 18, 2011 @ 3:23:08 PM

I completely agree Mourn. I do remember a time(when I was in grade school and high school) when Apple computers were complete crap. It wasn't until I went to college did I start to see an improvement in their performance. I remember in high school using them for architecture class with AutoCAD. Goodness those computers were pieces of crap. The only useful thing I found in a Mac when I was a kid was playing Cannon-fodder and Oregon Trail. Seems when they started releasing the Mac books they started to improve though.

For me...if I want something do just do office work, Windows and a Vaio suites those needs well. Or as you said, building your own PC is a good option too.

For music and Art, I gotta go with Macs.

EDIT: I should make a correction. Apple has served me well for the last 10 years. Not 15. 15 is an exaggeration. HA

Last edited by Jawknee on 7/18/2011 3:25:58 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lord carlos
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:12:58 AM
Reply

Was never into nintendo,always a sega fan as a kid....then i stabbed my 1st zombie to death in RE on ps1 and since that moment my desire to play with cute mushrooms or clouds with smiles & racing hedgehogs disappeared forever.
I'm sure nintendo will come up with a few good ways to make wii u stand apart from other consoles but i won't be buying one.
Now if nintendo brought out a game where the player could chainsaw his way through the mushroom kingdom and stomp on little kuppas then i'd be in!

Agree with this comment 9 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:59:29 AM

My feelings exactly. Same here.

I had a NES, but only because that's all that was out at the time.

I have owned every Sega and Sony system since then.

I'm sure Mario games are still a blast if you like rescuing the princess for the 1000th time and beating up Bowser again and again. But sorry, not for me.

I would rather play a Ratchet game. Platforming, awesome weapons, shooting, cool story, awesome characters and comedy!

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SoulController
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 2:26:24 PM

I went this same route. I had the NES, dabled a bit with Master system and was a genesis freak. My little cousin had an SNES so I played most of their big titles but I was all SEGA. Once the PS1 came around though it was over

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Excelsior1
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:24:37 AM
Reply

considering nuaghty dog is owned by sony a statement like this is not surprising. as for the stock drop, nintendo just gave a confusing and poor presentation.

nobody picked nintendo to have the impact they have had this generation so i think it would be unwise to underestimate them at this point. i have no doubt the wii u will be popular. i think nintendo is pretty smart company that had a great strategy for this gen that paid off in terms of marketshare vs say the massive uphill struggle sony has faced this gen. it's also interesting to note how both ms and sony are going after this part of the market as well.

the real question is what will the final specs of wii u be, and will nintendo make a serious attempt to pick up hardcore gamers. if it has good specs, and a decent online componet i'll definitely be interested.

Last edited by Excelsior1 on 7/14/2011 11:29:31 AM

Agree with this comment 6 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Looking Glass
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:50:55 AM

I think you're giving Nintendo at least a little bit more credit than it deserves. True, the Wii has been a massive success but the thing is this actually surprised Nintendo in addition to everyone else. As I understand it for them the Wii was essentially a semi-desperate crapshoot that just happened to pay off big time. A last ditch attempt to stay in the console business. And yes Nintendo has had it's share of hits like the NES, the SNES, and the DS. But they've also had their share of misses like the Virtual Boy and the Game Cube. And now it looks to be a distinct possibility that the recently released 3DS is going to fit in the category of Nintendo's missteps.

Nintendo did get off to an awesome start this generation but there is a strong possibility that their good fortune may not last with the Kinect still riding high (for the time being anyway) on it's novelty, the PS3's strong and growing exclusive software library, and the PS Vita being widely applauded and having dozens of developers giving it their support.

And yes skepticism from someone at Sony (Naughty Dog to more specific) is not surprising. However Justin Richmond is far from alone in his skepticism. A lot of other people who are not from Sony are also expressing skepticism about the Wii U, and perhaps rightfully so.

Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/14/2011 11:51:18 AM

Agree with this comment 9 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Looking Glass
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:00:52 PM

Oh, and when I mentioned Nintendo's missteps I forgot to mention the Nintendo 64. That definitely didn't work out all that well if I'm not mistaken.

Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/14/2011 12:02:22 PM

Agree with this comment 7 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:48:47 PM

I believe the PS1 sold better but the 64 had better graphics.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 8 down Disagree with this comment

Looking Glass
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:53:57 PM

@ AlexanderTH3GR8

The Nintendo 64 was more technologically advanced than the PS1. However the N64 was also held back by a poor design choice: using cartridges as opposed to CDs. This caused capacity issues and limited the N64s ability to compete. And the fact that the cartridges were also expensive to produce didn't help either. So no matter which way you cut it the N64 does constitute a misstep by Nintendo.

Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/14/2011 7:58:13 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 1:46:42 PM

I don't understand all the thumbdowns, the last time I checked my comment is a fact.

@Looking Glass, I know the PS1 used discs and the 64 didn't, that's what I meant that the PS1 sold better.

Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 7/15/2011 1:51:27 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 1:55:39 PM

Really, I didn't know the cartridges where expensive to produce still, I thought it would be cheaper cause of the older tech, when u look at it all the way back from the NES day's

Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 7/15/2011 1:56:56 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Looking Glass
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 6:19:26 PM

@ AlexanderTH3GR8

The manufacturing process for ROM cartridges was more complex and they were harder and more costly to develop for. This is in turn caused a lot of third party developers to turn away from Nintendo. Squaresoft was among them, who then proceeded to make Final Fantasy VII for the PS1 as opposed to the N64 as originally planned. And we all know how that played out. If you want more details you can look "Nintendo 64" up on wikipedia.

But you really seem to be missing the point. As I said, no matter which way you cut it the Nintendo 64 was one of Nintendo's missteps and it ended up being a rather damaging misstep for Nintendo. Being more technologically advanced than the PS1 does not change that.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Saturday, July 16, 2011 @ 12:44:22 AM

Yah I knew what their problem was. Like everything u said, that's why the PS1 sold better.

Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 7/16/2011 12:48:25 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Looking Glass
Saturday, July 16, 2011 @ 6:53:32 PM

@ AlexanderTH3GR8

Yup. The PS1 sold better in no small part because Nintendo screwed up with the N64.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

jimmyhandsome
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:25:39 AM
Reply

I'm not sold either. I've outlined my issues with the Wii U when it was announced last month, but I think Nintendo bit off more than they could chew with this one. The tech wasn't that impressive (yet) and I honestly hate the idea of having more than 1 kind of controller necessary for multiplayer (or even single player) games.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:29:05 AM
Reply

Im sold. Zelda and Metroid in HD? Yea please!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 7 down Disagree with this comment

BeezleDrop
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:37:34 AM

Yeah but that is it Jawk, Mario HD, Zelda HD, and Metroid HD. How can the awkward tablet really offer that much variety in other Multiplatform games? Why shouldn't I get my Multiplat games for PS3? I dunno but I really was anything but impressed with the Wii U reveal.

Agree with this comment 8 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:57:44 AM

Are you impressed by the wii u or just the titles you can play?

I'm honestly not impressed by the wii u, I think it's got some cool tech, but only the games make me want the thing. That's not enough for me. Nothing against Nintendo though, they are smart over there.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:30:34 PM

@ Bigrailer, I am impressed by the Wii U. I think it holds a lot of potential. Nintendo has never let me down. Not even with the Wii. My Wii game collection pales in comparison to my PS3 collection but that's okay because the I have for Wii are quality.

@Beezle, If you want to see what they are doing with some multiplatform titles, google their plans for Batman Arkhem City. Nintendo has also said they plan to invest in 3rd party games with the Wii U. It's something they didn't do with the Wii and they recognize that as a mistake.

I don't really care for multiplatform games on Nintendo platforms anyway. I buy Nintendo hardware to play Nintendo games just like I buy Sony hardware to play Sony published games. As many know already I am an absolute whore when it comes to the Zelda franchise. As long as Nintendo continues to make Zelda games and fun hardware to play them on, I will continue to support them. Some of their best Zelda games are on the DSi which incorporate stylus controls into the game play. I have complete faith Nintendo will do the same when it comes to the Wii U. Nintendo has never let me down. I know some of you hate the Wii, but I don't. I had my fun with it and come the end of the year I'll be dusting that sucker off with glee to play The Legend of Zelda Skyward Sword.

Last edited by Jawknee on 7/14/2011 12:35:34 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 6 down Disagree with this comment

Nlayer
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 2:59:11 PM

I completely agree with Jawknee! I buy Nintendo consoles for the exclusive games. I honestly feel like it's worth the price just for those games alone.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:27:56 PM

I honestly think the WiiU is about 2 years too late to gain any traction in multi-platform development. By the time the multi-plat games aren't late-releasing (and probably inferior) ports, the next generation systems from Sony and M$ will be available and the WiiU will be in the same position as the Wii has been.

It will be good for the hardcore Nintendo fans finally to have first-party games in HD. It will be even better if those HD games are new productions rather than remakes, although the latter unfortunately seems more likely given recent history.


Last edited by Fane1024 on 7/14/2011 7:30:07 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PS3addict
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:45:52 AM
Reply

I just hate the fact that there can only be one tablet used per system. I am stoked about a new Zelda and Metroid in HD, but come on Nintendo, think big here!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SpikeSpiegel
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 11:52:59 AM
Reply

As long as some developers come up with some more insane games like they did with Madworld and No More Heroes, then this may be an eventual purchase. Along with Zelda, Mario, and Metroid, those were a couple of the only games that made the Wii worth maybe having. Nothing spells "stress reliever" like having a chainsaw attached to your arm and randomly decapitating strange looking characters.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Xombito
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:04:29 PM
Reply

The screen on the controller isn't a touch screen? I thought it was.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Zorigo
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:07:27 PM

this being Nintendo, makers of the DS, you think it would be!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

frylock25
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:12:45 PM

"and the screen not being multi-touch is a "little weird." "

i think its not a multi touch screen, which i think means you can only touch it at one point at any given time. like the ds.

Last edited by frylock25 on 7/14/2011 12:14:20 PM

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Excelsior1
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:14:39 PM

as far as i know it has a ds style touch screen. at least that's people that had hands on time with it said.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:45:09 PM

It is a touch screen. Both with the stylus and your fingers.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:34:45 PM

As Fry said, it's not multi-touch like the iOS devices or the PSV. The supposed reason is that single-touch screens provide more precision. Cost is also likely a factor.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Zorigo
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:07:01 PM
Reply

Dont think its gonna hold up next gen either frankly. If theyd released this to compete with ps3 and x360 then they mightve had a chance, but even the x720 will out perform this, and im to assume (and hope) that the ps4 will out perform that.

mainly because sony is just the better consumer's company. I'd rather stick with them as they wont screw me over at every chance for every penny ive got.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:07:08 PM
Reply

I too thought the Wii would be a huge failure. I remember when it first came out and was outselling the PS3 by like a million to one.

I always told my Wii owning friend. Oh just you wait! When MGS4, Resident Evil and Final Fantasy hit the PS3 and X-Box, nobody is going to care about the Wii!

I just didn't realize at the time, that the people buying the Wii wouldn't care about those games not being on their console.

The Wii was different though. It was the first time that EVERYONE got in the action. From stay at home moms to grandparents. This time you're not going to have that.

Before it didn't have to compete with Sony and MS. This time, IT HAS TO. And I know a lot of people prefer killing s*it in Killzone, Uncharted, Gears of War, Fable and Infamous than they do running around as fat plumbers.




Last edited by Fabi on 7/14/2011 12:09:33 PM

Agree with this comment 8 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Zorigo
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:09:41 PM

MMM, the wii made gaming more mainstream, i think now the media might focus on the more solid gaming.
that said casual gaming is for the leymans of the world. the 'not-wierd' people RE bens earlier article this week. so i mean if MS or Sony do some good casual stuff aswell as hardcore, (and with move theyve got casual covered and with the potentially advanced tech of a ps4 theyve got the hardcore covered)

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

GuyverLT
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 3:48:34 PM

I think one of main reasons the Wii sold more is because it was the cheapest system to buy at the time & still is.... I think... I don't believe it would have had the same success sale wise if it was the same price as the PS3 or even the 360.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bebestorm
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:17:27 PM
Reply

Hmmm why would a Sony first party developer have anything good to say about another company's gaming hardware?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:50:41 PM

Probably because he was asked. I doubt he went running to media publications begging them to publish his opinion on the Wii U.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

GuyverLT
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 3:54:36 PM

Ha was asked a simple question and he gave HIS OPINION. Why does it have to be some kind of motive behind it just because he just happens to work for Sony? He is not the 1st person to make that statement or something similar to it and you know what he's not gonna be the last. When the Wii-U (worst name ever) comes out and Nintendo makes good on the promises that they have made so far then you won't see many people making statements like these.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

maxpontiac
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:19:24 PM
Reply

Sorry, but I am with Naughty Dog on this one. Sony and the PS3 does everything I need right now.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:39:15 PM
Reply

Definitely not sold. No multi-touch on the screen (didn't know that one - oh boy)? That's just plain poor these days. not only that but I believe that the WiiU is limited one of these controller devices per console. there are a whole series of wholes in this thing that just remain a mystery. As does the approach nintendo is taking for the online - basically theya re not doing as MS and Sony have done. they are leaving everything up to publishers, so there is no single overall authentication system, no central friends list, nothing like that. It's all handled per game/per publisher.

I don't know, but in this day and age that's positively primitive. I know that this isn't strictly PlayStation related, but good grief Nintendo, what *are* you thinking. You're talking about capturing hardcore gamers and you're just not even close to the target.

Interesting that Justin Richmond says that there's nothing the WiiU can do that the Vita plus PS3 can't. that more or less mirrors my own thoughts on the matter. In which case why not add a Vita to your PS3 rather than going for the WiiU if you already have or are considering a PS3? After all PS3 has a great library of games, Vita plays downloadable PSP titles plus it's own games, and Vita is a handheld console on the move in it's own right, and not merely a tethered device like the WiiU controller is.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:49:22 PM

From my understanding it was either Single touch with one finger and a stylus or multi-touch with multiple fingers and no stylus. I prefer the former.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:50:12 PM

Oh WOW. I didn't know that. So there will be no network on the Wii U? Isn't that kind of what they did with the Wii as well?

They have to realize they aren't just competing with the PS3 and X-Box. But with the PSN and Live as well.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:52:36 PM

There will be a new network. Nintendo is planning on revamping their network so it's more like Xbox LIVE and PSN for the Wii U which is something they should have done to begin with but oh well.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:57:10 PM

Oh ok, they were gonna be in big trouble if they didn't.

Their network is probably still gonna be so far behind though. Look at how long it took the PSN to catch up to Live.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:11:40 PM

Jaw,

I was reading comments from Nintendo themselves on this topic and although they made it clear that they were improving things and building something new for WiiU, it was equally clear from their statements that they would not be doing as PSN and XBL do. It was stated quite categorically that publishers would handle everything much in the same way as they have with the Wii.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:15:31 PM

Hmm...well if their plan is to woo core gamers with core games they are going to need to think twice about what kind of network they plan to use. I don't really mind if it is different than LIVE or PSN but I do think they need to make it just as capable.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

GuyverLT
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 4:12:00 PM

I know that you can continue playing the games on that tablet controller thingy, but I saw an interview that Reggie guy did at E3 where said that while you can still play the game on the controller if someone else wants to watch regular T.V., but you can't leave the room with it you have to be in the same room where the console is in order for the controller to actually work.

Now I know the may not be a big deal for some,,,, but let's just say theoretically speaking your family or friends want to watch the game, now if they're like my family and homies they're gonna be extra loud watching a basketball or football etc, and you don't to be around all that noise while your playing the game, but you can't leave the room because the controller won't work if your not in the room with the console..... Hmmmm.... I get you could just take the entire system with you to another part of the house that has a t.v in it in which case I suppose this won't be a problem.

What are you guys thoughts about this feature of the Wii-U?

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 4:19:38 PM

It's a feature that is great that it's there. But it sure as hell wont make me want to go out and buy one. I for one would never need to leave the room because someone needs to use the TV. We have multiple TVs in my house. And if for someone reason someone wants to use my TV to watch TV while I'm playing, unless I'm knee deep in something I cant stop. I will turn it off and just play later.

Sorta like how being able to have Linux on the PS3 was. I was never, ever going to need it. But it was nice knowing I could if I wanted to.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 5:07:39 PM

Guyver, I like the feature but your concerns are warranted. I think maybe the problem is lag and downgraded video quality. Example, with PSP and PS3 remote play, you can play PS1 games on your PSP using your PS3 through remote play from anywhere in your house but it lags and the video quality is noticeably downgraded. That maybe the problem Nintendo is running into.

Luckely for me, no one in my house hold watched sports games so this won't be a problem for me.

Last edited by Jawknee on 7/14/2011 5:08:57 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

GuyverLT
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 5:41:10 PM

@Jawknee
Let me clarify, It's not really a concern of mine either, if I do decide to get one (depending on what exclusive titles it has), then it will be in MY room were I have to worry about anyone coming in asking if they can watch T.V. not in the family room in the 1st place. I'm sure it won't be that big a deal, It could be a problem for some, but not many.

Last edited by GuyverLT on 7/14/2011 5:44:16 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LittleBigMidget
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 12:55:57 PM
Reply

Not sold either. Wii U looks awful so far imo

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:07:13 PM
Reply

Since most Wiis just collect dust, I think it might be hard to sell people on another gimmick. There are just too many problems with this thing and I'm skeptical that it could be as successful as its predecessor. The motion thing was easy, this is going to have people waving a giant controller in front of the TV or placing it on the floor, and that might be a stretch.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Claire C
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 3:20:32 PM

Yah! I think people just want a new console from them where the funamentals are all correct, like the tech, online, 3rd parties, etc. Another motion controller to add to the collection on the living room table isn't it.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

kevinater321
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:11:30 PM
Reply

I thought it had multitouch...

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

kevinater321
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:18:03 PM

Never mind, just researched it and honestly that just retarded. Ninty is really cornering themselves with this thing...

Last edited by kevinater321 on 7/14/2011 1:18:21 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Kiryu
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:39:54 PM
Reply

Reached Level 25 in the UC3 Beta Naughty Dog.Looking forward for the full exp.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

amonte
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 1:47:22 PM
Reply

I havn't cared for Nintendo since the sixth generation when I got my PS2, and I was a huge Nintendo fan since NES, owned every single Nintendo product all the way to N64 and GBA SP (didn't own the GBA or GB though), just in case anyone thinks I'm a fanboy. I'm not at all interested in Wii U, the only Nintendo games that could interest me are Zelda, Metroid and Super Smash Bros but Nintendo always finds ways to mess those up and make them more easy, kiddie and casual.

The whole use the Wii U controller screen for interactivity with the game on TV screen could sound nice on paper, but so far nothing has been developed that is worthwhile and that isn't just a gimmick and we're talking since Gamecube/GBA to PS3/PSP days, that's almost ten years exactly, and everything that has been shown so far using the Wii U screen for interactivity has been crap as well. There's also playing against a buddy, one uses the TV screen, the other the controller screen so you guys can't see each other screen, that is flawed and a straight out lie because the person with the controller can also see the TV screen. So, I can cross that feature/selling point out and it's one of the Wii U's two features/selling points.

The other is being able to continue playing your Wii U game on the controller's screen. That is nice, again only on paper because you have to be within range of the Wii U console.

And that's it for Wii U's selling points.

Quick negatives, Wii U can only use one Wii U controller and the only way to do multiplayer is using Wiimotes so we go from supposedly hardcore console for hardcore games and come back to casual waggle crapfest games. The controller is huge. Nintendo's online department has always sucked and it seems like it's not going to change for Wii U. It's getting multiplatform games a year later. I'm not sure if there's more but those are the ones that were from the top of my head.

For the Nintendo fanboys that will say the Wii U is more powerful and will have better graphics. I don't think it's been officially said that the Wii U is more powerful, I think it's just being speculated by some that it is because of the chip that is supposedly going to use. But I believe no official word has been said and the chip it uses isn't the only important part that determines what a console can do and how powerful it is or what graphics it can produce. Also, even if it's true it would make it barely more powerful than the PS3 and 360 so there wouldn't be any noticable difference.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Claire C
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 3:17:03 PM
Reply

The Wii U doesn't even have analog sticks. It's got cirlce pads like the 3DS.. I'd buy a 360 2 over the Wii U. Poor Nintendo. I don't even know what they can do to get me as a customer again.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 4:49:47 PM

Have you tried the Circle pad on the 3DS? It works just as well. Better than the PSP's analog stick.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Claire C
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 5:06:49 PM

Yes I have. It's like a smoother version of the PSP's, but still inharently flawed imo.

Anything is better than the PSP pad. :P

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Russell Burrows
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 5:35:48 PM
Reply

Definitively and positively not buying a Wii U.

Crappy online?
Check!
No multitouch?
Check!
No analog triggers for shooters or raceing?
Check!
No blu ray playback?
Check!
No DVD playback?
Check!
No CD playback?
Check!

Battery life of the controller?

And most importantly is that those who started a game series on 360 or PS3 will tend to buy future iterations of that game series for that platform.

No purchase for the Fail U.
Buzz off! Failtendo!

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:01:45 PM

That obviously remains to be seen as neither you or anyone one this site has actually tested it or used the hardware.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

GuyverLT
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:27:51 PM

@ffrulez

I think you're seriously underestimating Nintendo here, it might not make sense to those of us who consider ourselves "hardcore gamers", but guess what the wii didn't make much sense b4 it came out and it still managed to be successful (to my surprise) they made motion gaming stuff work with the Wii remote thingy, knowing them they will figure out how to make game work with they're tablet controllers.

While the Wii-U isn't all that appealing to me.... YET, it would be downright foolish to count them out just because you don't know how they're tablet controller will work with games yet, again people were saying the same thing with the Wii remote and from my understanding it works well with games they made for it (I've tried the Wii a couple times, but it was just not for me).

I hope Nintendo doesn't put themselves in between a rock and a hard place by alienating that massive casual gaming group they accumulated over the past couple years, because if they give to much focus to trying to reclaim and recapture the hardcore audience they lost during and after the Gamecube, that's exactly what's going to happen.

Last edited by GuyverLT on 7/14/2011 7:32:03 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:35:36 PM

I think you might be giving Nintendo too much credit. The Wii was different. This controller is different in that it has a screen and it's huge. But it's not making anyone who's not a hardcore gamer say OH WOW THAT LOOKS FUN! And if you show that huge controller to the grandma who was playing Wii bowling, they are going to have no interest in it.

To me it just looks like a big Game Gear or a Nomad.

Last edited by Fabi on 7/14/2011 7:39:36 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

IMLightning
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:30:42 PM
Reply

While it can replicate it, the PS3 and Vita combo is a lot more expensive. And I don't think nearly as many people will have both as the amount of people that will have the Wii U, so I doubt many devs will work to use the handheld and console.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:36:54 PM

Tons of people will ALREADY have the PS3. Nobody is going to go out and buy a PS3 just so they can use it with the Vita. That makes no sense.

And aren't rumors leaning towards the whole Wii U setup to cost in the $400 range?

I bet were gonna see that on the Wii U as well. They might use the screen to do some pointless s*it if Nintendo forces them to. But in the end, it's not gonna add much to the game.

Last edited by Fabi on 7/14/2011 7:41:03 PM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:50:10 PM

You are probably right, but *you don't know* how expensive it will be. The WiiU could release at $499 (unlikely, but not impossible given Nintendo's practice of having profitable hardware). By then (mid- to late 2012), the PS3 and PSV will likely both be $249.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fabi
Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 7:55:02 PM

Even if it doesn't, I think he's assuming too much that people are going to want a Wii U because of the controller.

It's not technologically fresh as something like motion gaming was. It's not different enough for it to be gimmicky anymore.

If anything, they have to make it seem like it's the same thing as a Wii and that your Wii motes are going to still work with it, but now you can play these casual games with HD graphics!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 3:02:05 AM

Fane, I was thinking just that. By the time the WiiU arrives, a Vita/PS3 combo package should cost less than $499.99.

If the WiiU looks halfway like it will sell well, if I were Sony a year after the Vita launch, I might bundle a WiFi Vita with a base model PS3 in a single box and sell the sucker for $399.99. That would really put the hurt on WiiU. Actually it would really put the hurt on most everybody in the market.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 5:12:48 AM

Actually, the fact that the WiiU does use Wii controllers (presumably including the improved classic controller) is a selling point: unlike all three current systems, since everyone who buys one will almost certainly have a Wii, they won't have to spend a ton on extra controllers.

Just batteries. ;D

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fabi
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 11:32:39 AM

It's a selling point of course, but once again, it's not gonna be new enough to grab the eye of every mom, child and grandma like it did before.

Because let's not forget that the casual gamers don't care about high end graphics, so why go out and buy another Wii?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

FatherSun
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 3:24:05 PM

Until Nintendo announces the price of the WU stating that any product costs more than another is pure speculation. Depending on that pricing a PSV/3 combo may cost the same or potentially even less.

I agree with Highlander that Sony could essentially corner Nintendo with tactical pricing. I am sure Nintendo would not wish to engage in a price war when introducing new hardware. Sony has already exhibited this with the price of the Vita versus the 3DS. More bang for the buck.

A Vita/PS3 combo trumps the Wii-U. Simply for the fact that the VITA itself is a game system versus a satellite of system. And unless the Wii-U doubles the power and performance of current systems it is no competition. Nintendo will need to amaze me. I have no doubt that the system will sell. But if it sells as well or better than the Wii then Nintendo wins forever! lol... That would be a shocker.

Last edited by FatherSun on 7/15/2011 3:25:15 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 4:02:58 PM

Even if the WiiU was twice as powerful as the PS3 (current suggestion is about 50% more powerful), the games are still going to be 720p/1080i/1080p. The visual difference on a small screen or a ordinary HDTV are normal viewing distance are not as obvious as the difference jumping from 480p was.

But Yeah, the PS3/Vita combination would be unbeatable - especially if Sony were to bundle it in a single package released at the same time as the WiiU for the same (or similar) price.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

monkeypunch
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 7:16:16 PM
Reply

I don't know about anyone else but I don't like the way Nintendo is releasing underpowered systems (relatively). I don't know the specs (have they released them yet?) but I remember reading that they said they wanted to make it affordable and that sounded like another way of saying underpowered.

I know it's all about the games but if they said that 30 years ago we'd all be playing "retro" games. It's a huge exaggeration but it's like giving an artist a crayon vs a pencil. Maybe it's more like sony and ms give you a .3mm pencil with 100 refills and nintendo's gives you .5mm with 20 refills. :P

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Robochic
Friday, July 15, 2011 @ 7:24:26 PM
Reply

The WiiU sounds good but my problem is like it has been since the gamecube once they realize crap we rushed we are missing what the compitition has lets stop making enjoyable games for the console. My gamecube had the same thing and now my Wii does get used but only for zelda and epic mickey. I honestly enjoy using my 3ds more than my Wii I think nintendo does a better job with handhelds now a days then consoles.
@ jawknee did you get a 3ds yet?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PHOENIXZERO
Monday, July 18, 2011 @ 1:44:23 PM
Reply

Because Naughty Dog isn't bias or anything. Not like they're owned by Sony.

Yeah, the WiiU is five years too late and really with the next generation starting within the next two and a half years Nintendo might be shooting themselves in the foot.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

Are you getting Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor?
Yup, I'm nabbing this one now.
Yes, but I'm waiting for a while.
Maybe...not sure yet.
No, not interested.

Previous Poll Results